Viability and Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

October 4, 2011 updated by: Niels Risum, University Hospital, Gentofte, Copenhagen

The Importance of Viability for Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

30% of heart failure patients that receive a device for cardiac resynchronization therapy fail to show clinical improvement. The reason for lack of response is still unclear but factors such as scar tissue in the heart musculature, inadequate lead placement, device-settings and the degree of dyssynchrony before implant seems to be important. In this study, these factors are further investigated.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an established therapy for patients with severe heart failure, depressed left ventricular function and a wide QRS-complex. Large clinical trials have demonstrated unequivocal improvements in functional status, morbidity and mortality. However, 30 % of heart failure patients treated with a CRT-device do not benefit clinically. Several factors have been suggested to be important for the response to CRT such as mechanical dyssynchrony, presence of scar tissue in the myocardium, and device-optimization (among others). It is the purpose of this study to investigate the importance of these factors.

100 patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, eligible to CRT according to current guidelines, will be included. Patients are randomised to two arms. One group will have atrioventricular (AV)-optimization after implantation, the other AV -and interventricular (VV)-optimization. After 4 months patients are crossed-over to the other arm. Preimplantation patients are MR-scanned and low-dose dobutamine stress-echocardiography is performed. Furthermore patients will be examined by echocardiography and evaluation of clinical status

  1. Mechanical dyssynchrony can predict response to CRT. b. Measures of mechanical dyssynchrony is related to myocardial viability and conduction.
  2. Individual optimization based on conduction times will increase benefit to CRT. b. The effect of adding VV-optimization is related to myocardial viability.
  3. > 30 % of non-viable tissue globally in the myocardium is predictive of lack of CRT- response. b. Non-viable tissue located in the area of the left ventricular lead is predictive of non-response.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

100

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

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

Study Contact

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

      • Hellerup, Denmark, 2900
        • Recruiting
        • Gentofte University Hospital
        • Contact:
        • Contact:
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Niels Risum, M.D.
      • Lund, Sweden, 221 85
        • Recruiting
        • University Hospital Lund
        • Contact:
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Rasmus Borgquist, MD, PhD

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 and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • LVEF</= 35%, QRS-duration>/= 120 ms, NYHA-class II- IV.
  • Ischemic heart disease (> 50% stenosis in 1 or more major epicardial coronary artery or prior PCI or CABG.)
  • Optimal treatment ( beta-blocker, ACE-1 or ARB and spironolactone)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Pregnancy
  • Unstable angina pectoris
  • Chronical atrial fibrillation
  • Severe valvular disease
  • Dementia or mental retardation
  • Severe claustrophobia
  • Acute myocardial infarction < 3 months
  • Severe health condition threatening short-term survival
  • Severe kidney insufficiency, GFR < 35 ml/min/1.73 m2
  • Metal implants contraindicative of magnetic resonance scan

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: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: CRT group 1
Patients are AV-optimized the first 4 months,then AV- and VV-optimized the next 4 months.
Active Comparator: CRT group 2
Patients are AV- and VV-optimized the first 4 months,then AV-optimized the next 4 months.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Responders:Echocardiographic:>/= 10% increase in Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) or >/= 15 % reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV)
Time Frame: 4 and 8 months, ( follow up- 2 years)
4 and 8 months, ( follow up- 2 years)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
LVESV, LVEDV, Cardiac output (CO), Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) ProBNP Others: t-wave modulation all-cause mortality, cardiac death, hospitalization
Time Frame: 4 and 8 months (follow-up after 2 years)
4 and 8 months (follow-up after 2 years)
Clinical: >/= 25% increase in 6-min walk test or >/= 1 reduction in NYHA-class
Time Frame: 4 and 8 months (follow-up 2 years)
4 and 8 months (follow-up 2 years)

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Niels Risum, M.D., University Hospital Gentofte, Department of Cardiology
  • Study Chair: Thomas Fritz Hansen, M.D., University Hospital Gentofte, Department of Cardiology
  • Study Chair: Peter Søgaard, M.D., DMSc., Gentofte University Hospital, department of cardiology
  • Study Chair: Rasmus Borgquist, MD, PhD, University Hospital Lund
  • Study Chair: Niels E Bruun, MD, DMSc, Gentofte University Hospital, department of cardiology

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the 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

August 1, 2009

Primary Completion (Anticipated)

December 1, 2012

Study Completion (Anticipated)

June 1, 2013

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

August 7, 2009

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 7, 2009

First Posted (Estimate)

August 10, 2009

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

October 6, 2011

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 4, 2011

Last Verified

October 1, 2011

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

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.

Clinical Trials on Heart Failure

Clinical Trials on AV-optimization followed by AV- and VV-optimization

3
Subscribe