Dataset Information

Empiric versus imaging guided left ventricular lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy (ImagingCRT): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established treatment in heart failure patients. However, a large proportion of patients remain nonresponsive to this pacing strategy. Left ventricular (LV) lead position is one of the main determinants of response to CRT. This study aims to clarify whether multimodality imaging guided LV lead placement improves clinical outcome after CRT.The ImagingCRT study is a prospective, randomized, patient- and assessor-blinded, two-armed trial. The study is designed to investigate the effect of imaging guided left ventricular lead positioning on a clinical composite primary endpoint comprising all-cause mortality, hospitalization for heart failure, or unchanged or worsened functional capacity (no improvement in New York Heart Association class and <10% improvement in six-minute-walk test). Imaging guided LV lead positioning is targeted to the latest activated non-scarred myocardial region by speckle tracking echocardiography, single-photon emission computed tomography, and cardiac computed tomography. Secondary endpoints include changes in LV dimensions, ejection fraction and dyssynchrony. A total of 192 patients are included in the study.Despite tremendous advances in knowledge with CRT, the proportion of patients not responding to this treatment has remained stable since the introduction of CRT. ImagingCRT is a prospective, randomized study assessing the clinical and echocardiographic effect of multimodality imaging guided LV lead placement in CRT. The results are expected to make an important contribution in the pursuit of increasing response rate to CRT.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01323686. The trial was registered March 25, 2011 and the first study subject was randomized April 11, 2011.

SUBMITTER: Sommer A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3762069 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Empiric versus imaging guided left ventricular lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy (ImagingCRT): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Sommer Anders A Kronborg Mads Brix MB Poulsen Steen Hvitfeldt SH Böttcher Morten M Nørgaard Bjarne Linde BL Bouchelouche Kirsten K Mortensen Peter Thomas PT Gerdes Christian C Nielsen Jens Cosedis JC

Trials 20130426

<h4>Background</h4>Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established treatment in heart failure patients. However, a large proportion of patients remain nonresponsive to this pacing strategy. Left ventricular (LV) lead position is one of the main determinants of response to CRT. This study aims to clarify whether multimodality imaging guided LV lead placement improves clinical outcome after CRT.<h4>Methods/design</h4>The ImagingCRT study is a prospective, randomized, patient- and assesso ...[more]

PMID: 23782792

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established treatment in patients with heart failure and prolonged QRS duration where a biventricular pacemaker is implanted to achieve faster activation and more synchronous contraction of the left ventricle (LV). Despite the convincing effect of CRT, 30-40% of patients do not respond. Among the most important correctable causes of non-response to CRT is non-optimal LV lead position. METHODS:We will enroll 122 patients in this patient-blinded and assessor-blinded, randomized, clinical trial aiming to investigate if implanting the LV lead guided by electrical mapping towards the latest LV activation as compared with imaging-guided implantation, causes an excess increase in left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF). The patients are randomly assigned to either the intervention group: preceded by cardiac computed tomography of the cardiac venous anatomy, the LV lead is placed according to the latest LV activation in the coronary sinus (CS) branches identified by systematic electrical mapping of the CS at implantation and post-implant optimization of the interventricular pacing delay; or patients are assigned to the control group: placement of the LV lead guided by cardiac imaging. The LV lead is targeted towards the latest mechanical LV activation as identified by echocardiography and outside myocardial scar as identified by myocardial perfusion (MP) imaging. The primary endpoint is change in LVEF at 6-month follow up (6MFU) as compared with baseline measured by two-dimensional echocardiography. Secondary endpoints include relative percentage reduction in LV end-systolic volume, all-cause mortality, hospitalization for heart failure, and a clinical combined endpoint of response to CRT at 6MFU defined as the patient being alive, not hospitalized for heart failure, and experiencing improvement in NYHA functional class or/and?>?10% increase in 6-minute walk test. DISCUSSION:We assume an absolute increase in LVEF of 12% in the intervention group versus 8% in the control group. If an excess increase in LVEF can be achieved by LV lead implantation guided by electrical mapping, this study supports the conduct of larger trials investigating the impact of this strategy for LV-lead implantation on clinical outcomes in patients treated with CRT. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02346097 . Registered on 12 January 2015. Patients were enrolled between 16 February 2015 and 13 December 2017.

Project description:AimsThis registry was created to describe the experience of 76 Italian centres with a large cohort of recipients of multipoint pacing (MPP) capable cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices.Methods and resultsA total of 507 patients in whom these devices had been successfully implanted were enrolled between August 2013 and May 2015. We analysed: (i) current clinical practices for the management of such patients, and (ii) the impact of MPP on heart failure clinical composite response and on the absolute change in ejection fraction (EF) at 6 months. Multipoint pacing was programmed to 'ON' in 46% of patients before discharge. Methods of optimizing MPP programming were most commonly based on either the greatest narrowing of the QRS complex (38%) or the electrical delays between the electrodes (34%). Clinical and echocardiographic follow-up data were evaluated in 232 patients. These patients were divided into two groups according to whether MPP was programmed to 'ON' (n = 94) or 'OFF' (n = 138) at the time of discharge. At 6 months, EF was significantly higher in the MPP group than in the biventricular-pacing group (39.1 ± 9.6 vs. 34.7 ± 7.6%; P < 0.001). Even after adjustments, early MPP activation remained an independent predictor of absolute increase in LVEF of ≥5% (odds ratio 2.5; P = 0.001). At 6 months, an improvement in clinical composite score was recorded in a greater proportion of patients with MPP-ON than in controls (56 vs. 38%; P = 0.009). On comparing optimal MPP and conventional vectors, QRS was also seen to have decreased significantly (P < 0.001).ConclusionThis study provides information that is essential in order to deal with the expected increase in the number of patients receiving MPP devices in the coming years. The results revealed different practices among centres, and establishing the optimal programming that can maximize the benefit of MPP remains a challenging issue. Compared with conventional CRT, MPP improved clinical status and resulted in an additional increase in EF.Clinical trial registrationhttp://www.clinicaltrial.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT02606071.

Project description:AimsA waiting period of more than 3 months is recommended for patients before undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, due to an anticipated high mortality rate, early implementation of CRT might be beneficial for some patients. We aimed to evaluate the rate and the probability of left ventricular (LV) function improvement and their predictors in patients with heart failure (HF) with indications for CRT.Methods and resultsFrom March 2011 to February 2014, a total of 5625 hospitalized patients for acute HF were consecutively enrolled in 10 tertiary hospitals. Among them, we analysed 1792 patients (mean age 63.96 ± 15.42 years, female 63.1%) with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35% at the baseline echocardiography and divided them into three groups: 144 with left bundle branch block (LBBB), 136 with wide QRS complexes without LBBB, and 1512 not having these findings (control). We compared and analysed these three groups for improvement of LV function at follow-up echocardiography. In patients who met CRT indications (patients with LBBB or wide QRS complexes without LBBB), logistic regression was performed to identify risk factors for no improvement of LV. No improvement of LV was defined as LVEF ≤ 35% at follow-up echocardiography or the composite adverse outcomes: death, heart transplantation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or use of a ventricular assist device before follow-up echocardiography. A classification tree was established using the binary recursive partitioning method to predict the outcome of patients who met CRT indications. In a median follow-up of 11 months, LVEF improvement was observed in 24.3%, 15.4%, and 40.5% of patients with LBBB, wide QRS complexes without LBBB, and control, respectively. Patients meeting CRT indications had higher 3 month mortality rates than the control (24.6% vs. 17.7%, P = 0.002). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that large LV end-systolic dimension [odds ratio (OR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.15, P < 0.001], low LVEF (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.98, P = 0.006), diabetes requiring insulin (OR 6.49, 95% CI 2.53-19.33, P < 0.001), and suboptimal medical therapy (OR 6.85, 95% CI 3.21-15.87, P < 0.001) were significant factors predictive of no improvement. A decision tree analysis was consistent with these results.ConclusionsPatients with CRT indications had higher mortality during their follow-up compared with control. LV function improvement was rare in this population, especially when they had some risk factors. These results suggest that the uniform waiting period before CRT implantation could be reconsidered and individualized.

Dataset Information

Empiric versus imaging guided left ventricular lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy (ImagingCRT): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Publications

Empiric versus imaging guided left ventricular lead placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy (ImagingCRT): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets