Paracor Ventricular Support System (PVSS) for Patients With Heart Failure (PEERLESS-HF)

May 14, 2012 updated by: Paracor Medical, Inc

Paracor Ventricular Support System: United States Clinical Investigational Plan

This is a limited safety and feasibility study to evaluate the PVSS Introducer and Paracor Ventricular Support System when used to treat patients with heart failure. The implant, which is loaded onto the delivery system, is placed over the epicardial surface of the right and left ventricles.

No formal hypothesis testing will be performed; descriptive statistics will be used to summarize patient outcomes. The results of the study will be used to guide the design and sample size estimation of future studies.

Study Overview

Status

Terminated

Detailed Description

Please refer to brief summary.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

39

Phase

  • Phase 1

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Alabama
      • Birmingham, Alabama, United States, 35294
        • University of Alabama at Birmingham, Division of Cardiovascular Disease
    • Colorado
      • Denver, Colorado, United States, 80262
        • University of Colorado, Health Sciences Center
    • Florida
      • Gainesville, Florida, United States, 32610
        • University of Florida, Division of Cardiology
    • Georgia
      • Atlanta, Georgia, United States, 30322
        • Emory University Hospital
    • Maryland
      • Baltimore, Maryland, United States, 21201
        • University of Maryland Medical Center
      • Baltimore, Maryland, United States, 21287
        • The Johns Hopkins Hospital
    • Minnesota
      • Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States, 55417
        • Minneapolis VA Medical Center
    • Missouri
      • Kansas City, Missouri, United States, 64111
        • Mid America Heart Institute
    • Nebraska
      • Lincoln, Nebraska, United States, 68506
        • BryanLGH Heart Institute
    • Ohio
      • Columbus, Ohio, United States, 43210
        • The Ohio State University Heart Center
    • Pennsylvania
      • Hershey, Pennsylvania, United States, 17033
        • Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center
    • Texas
      • Houston, Texas, United States, 77030
        • The Methodist Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 80 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • NYHA functional class II or III
  • Best medical therapy
  • Ejection fraction <= 35%

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Heart measurements too large or small for implant sizes
  • Intra-cardiac thrombus
  • Restrictive cardiomyopathy
  • Not a candidate for sternotomy
  • Expected adhesions
  • Previous coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)
  • Active infection
  • Stroke, surgery, or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) within 3 months
  • Myocardial infarction (MI) within 1 month

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Non-Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Death or Additional Surgical Session at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 months
6 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Implant Success (Number of Participants Successfully Implanted)
Time Frame: 1 day
"Implant success" refers to the ability to successfully deliver a device onto the epicardial surface and leave the device in a satisfactory position.
1 day
Change in NYHA Functional Class
Time Frame: Baseline to 6 months
Change in NYHA functional class between baseline and 6 months. "Maintained" means the participant's functional class remains the same as baseline. "Improved" means the participant's functional class has improved (become lower in number) by at least one class. "Worsened" means the participatn's functional class has deteriorated (become higher in number) by at least one class.
Baseline to 6 months
Changes in Left Ventricular Diameters
Time Frame: Baseline to 6 months
Mean change in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) and left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD) from baseline to 6 months (echocardiographic measurements)
Baseline to 6 months
Changes in Left Ventricular Volumes
Time Frame: Baseline to 6 months
Mean change in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDv) and left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) from baseline to 6 months (echocardiographic measurements)
Baseline to 6 months
Change in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction
Time Frame: Baseline to 6 months
Mean change in left ventricular ejection fraction from baseline to 6 months (echocardiographic measurements)
Baseline to 6 months
Change in Left Ventricular Mass
Time Frame: Baseline to 6 months
Mean change in left ventricular mass from baseline to 6 months (echocardiogram measurements)
Baseline to 6 months
Changes in 6 Minute Walk
Time Frame: Baseline to 6 months
Mean change in 6 minute walk distance (meters) between baseline and 6 months
Baseline to 6 months
Changes in Cardiopulmonary Tests
Time Frame: Baseline to 6 months
Mean change in Peak VO2 (ml/kg/min) between baseline and 6 months
Baseline to 6 months
Mean Changes in Overall Minnesota Living With Heart Failure (MLHF) Quality of Life Questionnaire Score
Time Frame: Baseline to 6 months
The MLHF Quality of Life (QOL) Questionnaire evaluates the effects of heart failure on a subject's physical, emotional, social and mental dimensions of quality of life. Each of 21 questions is scored as to how much heart failure has impacted the subject, from 0-no impact to 5-very much (overall score can range from 0 to 105). Prior studies have shown a 10-point improvement (10-point decrease in overall score) correlated with a 1 NYHA class improvement, and 10-point worsening (10-point increase in score) was associated with a higher risk of hospitalization or death.
Baseline to 6 months
Number of Adverse Events
Time Frame: Study duration
Total adverse events reported prior to study closure
Study duration
Number of Participants Who Died
Time Frame: Study duration
Total number of patient deaths reported prior to study closure
Study duration

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

January 1, 2005

Primary Completion (Actual)

April 1, 2007

Study Completion (Actual)

April 1, 2011

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 10, 2006

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 10, 2006

First Posted (Estimate)

February 14, 2006

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

May 21, 2012

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 14, 2012

Last Verified

May 1, 2012

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 102.1

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe