Clinical Monitoring Strategy Versus Electrophysiology-guided Algorithmic Approach With a New LBBB After TAVI (COME-TAVI)

April 2, 2024 updated by: Montreal Heart Institute

Comparison of a Clinical Monitoring Strategy Versus Electrophysiology-guided Algorithmic Approach in Patients With a New Left Bundle Branch Block After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) a Bayesian Randomized Trial (COME-TAVI)

The primary hypothesis of the proposed study is that an electrophysiology-based algorithmic approach is superior to standard clinical follow-up with 30-day monitoring in reducing the combined endpoint of syncope, hospitalization, and death in patients in patients with new of left bundle branch block following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

Study Overview

Detailed Description

The study population consists of pacemaker-free patients that are 18 years or older undergoing a TAVI with new onset left bundle branch block. Patient consent is required.

Patients meeting the inclusion criteria will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to one of the following two groups:

Group 1: electrophysiology-based algorithmic approach

Group 2: standard clinical follow-up with transcutaneous cardiac monitoring.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

200

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

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

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Age ≥18 years
  • Informed consent to participate
  • Persistent new-onset LBBB after TAVI implantation (i.e. present at day 2)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Prior pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
  • Pre-existing right bundle branch block (RBBB) or LBBB (i.e., prior to TAVI)
  • Class I or IIA indication for PPM implantation according to management guidelines

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: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Other: EP-based approach/pacemaker implant

Subjects will undergo an EP study prior to hospital discharge and will receive a pacemaker implantation if the HV interval is ≥65 msec.

In the case where the electrical slowdown is not confirmed by the electrophysiological study, the participant will not have a pacemaker implantation.

Patient will be in the electrophysiology laboratory. The doctor will freeze the groin area and a medication may be given to help the patient relax. A catheter will be inserted into the groin up to the heart and the heart's electrical system will be recorded.
Other: Compared transcutaneous cardiac monitor
Subjects will undergo a minimum of 72 hour ECG monitoring in hospital and receive transcutaneous monitoring prior to hospital discharge for a duration of 30 days.

Transcutaneous cardiac patches will allow continuous electrocardiographic monitoring for a 30-day period. For the first randomized patients at the Montreal Heart Institute, Icentia was used and then was changed to a m-Health® device which allows continuous cardiac monitoring. The PocketECG from m-Health® is attached to 3 electrodes on the chest and contains a SIM card that transmits to a server located in Burlington, Ontario .The COME-TAVI coordinating center and the associated site will be informed rapidly of any events that occur . These events include:

Ventricular fibrillation; Sustained ventricular tachycardia Any RR interval >5 sec; Third-degree AV block or Mobitz 2 AV block;

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Number of patients with cardiovascular hospitalization, and/or syncope, and/or death after TAVI.
Time Frame: 12 months
This is the number of participants who experienced cardiovascular hospitalizations, and/or syncope, and/or death after TAVI.
12 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Number of participants with cardiovascular hospitalizations.
Time Frame: 12 months
This is the number of participants who were hospitalized for cardiovascular reasons within one-year post-TAVI.
12 months
Number of participants with hospitalisations (Total)
Time Frame: 12 months
This is the number of participants who were hospitalized one-year post-TAVI.
12 months
Number of participants with emergency visits.
Time Frame: 12 months
This is the number of participants who had emergency visits after TAVI.
12 months
Number of participants experiencing syncope
Time Frame: 12 months
This is the number of participants who experienced syncope after TAVI.
12 months
Cost-effectiveness of EP-guided procedure compared to cardiac monitoring [incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER)].
Time Frame: 12 months
This is the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) for one strategy compared to the other.
12 months
Number of procedural complications in the group of EP-guided procedure compared to the group of cardiac monitoring.
Time Frame: 30 days
This is the number of procedural complications in the group of EP-guided approach compared to cardiac monitoring within 30 days.
30 days
Number of atrio-ventricular blocks in the group of EP-guided procedure compared to the group of transcutaneous cardiac monitoring.
Time Frame: 12 months
This is the number of atrio-ventricular blocks in the EP-guided procedure group compared to the transcutaneous cardiac monitoring group within 12 months of TAVI
12 months

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Léna Rivard, MD, MSC, Montreal Heart Institute

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 (Actual)

October 15, 2017

Primary Completion (Estimated)

December 1, 2024

Study Completion (Estimated)

December 1, 2026

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 6, 2016

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 5, 2017

First Posted (Actual)

October 6, 2017

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

April 3, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 2, 2024

Last Verified

April 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

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 Aortic Valve Stenosis

Clinical Trials on Pacemaker implant

3
Subscribe