ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT04139616PROMOTEUpdated Jun 1, 2026

Prospective Validation of a Pre-Specified Algorithm for the Management of Conduction Disturbances Following TAVR

An observational study in Conduction Disturbances, Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement and Permanent Pacemaker Implantation, sponsored by Centre de Recherche de l'Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Quebec. Recruiting at 1 site in Canada. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-06-01.

Sponsored by Centre de Recherche de l'Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Quebec · Observational

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Feb 2020; still recruiting 6 years 8 months later.
Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
2,000
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The high incidence and variety of conduction disturbances post-TAVR represents a major challenge in the periprocedural management of TAVR recipients. Despite the growing body of knowledge on this topic, the large variability in the management of these complications has translated into a high degree of uncertainty regarding the most appropriate treatment of a large proportion of such patients. The implementation of a pre-specified treatment strategy translating into a more uniform practice regarding the management of conduction disturbances post-TAVR applied to a large cohort of patients would permit to identify the benefits and drawbacks of each specific aspect of the treatment algorithm proposal. This may also help to improve both the management and clinical outcomes of the complex group of patients with conduction disturbances associated with TAVR. In the end, the final objective of a pre-specified strategy for managing conduction disturbances post-TAVR should be to obtain a low rate of PPM without increasing the risk of sudden death or life threatening arrhythmic events following hospital discharge, and all this while avoiding an excessive prolongation of the hospitalization period following the TAVR procedure.

Read the detailed description

The objectives of the study are:

  • Feasibility: to validate and determine the applicability of a pre-specified algorithm for managing conduction disturbances in consecutive patients undergoing TAVR, also evaluating the percentage of patients included in each group of the algorithm strategy.
  • Efficacy: (i) to evaluate the rate of permanent pacemaker implantation in-hospital and at 30 days compared to that of the year prior to the implementation of the protocol, (ii) to determine the incidence of sudden death at 30 days and at 1-year follow-up.
02

Conditions studied

  • Conduction Disturbances
  • Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
  • Permanent Pacemaker Implantation

Keywords

  • atrioventricular block
  • complete heart block
  • high-degree atrioventricular block
  • intraventricular conduction delay
  • left bundle branch block
  • Permanent pacemaker implantation
  • Right bundle branch block
03

In context

Atrioventricular Block

117 studies on the registry are indexed under Atrioventricular Block; 43 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 2,000 is above the median of 300 across 37 observational studies indexed under Atrioventricular Block.

Browse Atrioventricular Block studies →

Lead sponsor

Centre de Recherche de l'Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Quebec is the lead sponsor of 23 studies on the registry; 2 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

Patients with aortic valve disease undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement without prior permanent pacemaker

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

-Patients with aortic valve disease undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Prior permanent pacemaker
  • Failure to provide signed for data collection
  • Impossibility for a follow-up
  • Unwillingness to follow the pre-specified strategy for the management of conduction disturbances
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
2,000 participants (estimated)
Target follow-up
1 Year
Patient registry
Yes

Groups and cohorts

  • No ECG changes in patients without pre-existing RBBB

    Patients with no new conduction disturbances on the ECG performed immediately post-TAVR (and no episodes of HAVB/CHB during the procedure) have a very low risk of developing HAVB/CHB or any conduction disturbance within the hours-days following the procedure. In these cases, temporary pacing will be discontinued at the end of the procedure. However, continuous ECG monitoring until hospital discharge is recommended. A 12-lead ECG is recommended 24 hours after the procedure. If no arrhythmic episodes and no ECG changes occur within the 24 hours post-procedure, the patient can be safely discharged (the day after TAVR) with no other monitoring measures in case of otherwise uneventful clinical course (absence of other TAVR related adverse events). If the patient has to remain hospitalized because of other reasons or TAVR complications, telemetry would be recommended (but no strictly required) for the detection of post-TAVR tachyarrhythmias or late ECG changes.

  • Patients with pre-existing RBBB

    A temporary pacing wire is recommended to be maintained for 24 hours (or at least overnight) in all patients with prior RBBB, along with telemetry and daily ECG during the entire hospitalization period (minimum of 2 days). If any ECG changes occur during the initial 2-3 days, patients can be managed according to the proposed strategy (see management strategies for groups 3 and 5). If no ECG changes or significant bradyarrythmias occur within the 2-3 days following the procedure, the patient can be discharged. Considering that the increased risk of life threatening bradyarrhythmias in these patients may extend beyond the hospitalization period, the use of continuous ECG monitoring systems (minimum of 48 hours, up to 4 weeks) may be considered.

  • ECG changes in patients with prior conduction disturbances

    Any significant increase in PR or QRS interval will indicate to continuing the temporary pacing for 24 hrs, with daily ECG and telemetry for 1-2 days. If the ECG changes regress in \<24 hrs, an earlier removal of the temporary pacing may be considered. Also, a strategy of multiple ECGs during the first 24 hrs may be considered. If ECG changes regress or no further changes occur the patient can be discharged with no PPM at 2 days post-TAVR. If 24 hrs post-TAVR, the PR and QRS interval remain stable but \>240 or \>150 ms, respectively, and ≥20 ms longer than baseline, maintaining the temporary pacing wire for another 24 hrs is recommended. If no decrease in the PR or QRS duration occurs at day 2, the patient can be considered at risk for more advanced conduction disturbances requiring PPM. The use of an EP study may be a reasonable option for deciding PPM in those patients with prior conduction disturbances with worsening of ECG changes post-TAVR

  • New-onset LBBB

    Temporary pacing for 24 hrs is recommended, in all patients with new-onset LBBB post-TAVR. Earlier removal of the temporary pacing and discharged at day 1 can be considered if LBBB resolves in \<24 hrs. If LBBB persists but no further progression of the duration of the QRS or PR interval is observed at day 1, temporary pacing can be discontinued. If no further ECG changes are observed up to day 2-3 post-TAVR, the patient can be discharged. These patients are however at increased risk of HAVB/CHB requiring PPM, and continuous ECG monitoring and/or EP studies may be considered. If further prolongation of the QRS or PR interval is observed at day 1, the temporary pacing is recommended for an additional 24 hrs. If the prolongation of the QRS or PR intervals continues at day 2, evaluation with EP studies or PPM implantation may be considered. The occurrence of any episode of HAVB/CHB following TAVR in a patient with new-onset LBBB will be considered an indication for PPM

  • HAVB/CHB during the periprocedural period

    Maintaining temporary pacing in patients with procedural persistent HAVB/CHB, and monitoring in intensive care unit are recommended. If HAVB/CHB persists at 24 hrs, PPM is recommended. If HAVB/CHB recovers the day after TAVR, the temporary pacing can be removed and the patient can remain hospitalized for 1 day. If another episode of HAVB/CHB occurs, PPM is recommended. If no other episode of HAVB/CHB occurs, and no other features potentially justifying PPM exist the patient can be discharged. Temporary pacing is recommended for 24 hrs in patients with transient HAVB during the procedure, with telemetry and daily ECG for 2 days. Discontinuing temporary pacing may be considered in those cases with brief episodes of HAVB/CHB and normal ECG. If no recurrent episodes of HAVB/CHB occur, and the patient has no other potential indications for PPM the patient can be discharged at day 2. PPM would be indicated if any recurrent episode of HAVB/CHB occurs during the hospitalization period.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Rate of successful algorithm implementation and percentage of patients in each arm of the pre-specified algorithm

    Time frame: 1 year follow-up

  2. Incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation

    Time frame: At 30-day follow-up

  3. Incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation

    Time frame: At 1-year follow-up

  4. Incidence of sudden death

    Time frame: At 30-day follow-up

  5. Incidence of sudden death

    Time frame: At 1-year follow-up

Secondary outcomes

  1. Rate, timing of and reasons for permanent pacemaker implantation

    Rate, timing of and reasons for permanent pacemaker implantation in each group of the pre-specified algorithm

    Time frame: Before hospital discharge (between 1 to 30 days)

  2. Rate, timing of and reasons for permanent pacemaker implantation

    Rate, timing of and reasons for permanent pacemaker implantation in each group of the pre-specified algorithm

    Time frame: At 30-day follow-up

  3. Rate, timing of and reasons for permanent pacemaker implantation

    Rate, timing of and reasons for permanent pacemaker implantation in each group of the pre-specified algorithm

    Time frame: At 1 year follow-up

  4. Rate and timing of sudden death

    Rate and timing of sudden death in each group of the pre-specified algorithm

    Time frame: At 30-day follow-up

  5. Rate and timing of sudden death

    Rate and timing of sudden death in each group of the pre-specified algorithm

    Time frame: At 1-year follow-up

  6. Evaluation of arrhythmic events in patients with continuous ECG monitoring

    Evaluation of arrhythmic events in patients with continuous ECG monitoring at hospital discharge

    Time frame: After hospital discharge (up to 1-year)

  7. Evaluation of the rate and timing of permanent pacemaker implantation

    Time frame: After hospital discharge (up to 1-year)

  8. Rate of PPI among valve types

    Compare rate of permanent pacemaker implantation among different valve types

    Time frame: At 30-day follow-up

  9. Rate of PPI among valve types

    Compare rate of permanent pacemaker implantation among different valve types

    Time frame: At 1-year follow-up

  10. Pace dependency and pacing rate

    Determine the pace dependency and pacing rate in patients with periprocedural permanent pacemaker implantation (overall and in each subgroup of the algorithm)

    Time frame: At 30-day follow-up

  11. Pace dependency and pacing rate

    Determine the pace dependency and pacing rate in patients with periprocedural permanent pacemaker implantation (overall and in each subgroup of the algorithm)

    Time frame: At 1-year follow-up

  12. Factors associated with sudden death or permanent pacemaker implantation

    Determine factors associated with sudden death or permanent pacemaker implantation during the follow-up period overall and in each algorithm group

    Time frame: At 30-day follow-up

  13. Factors associated with sudden death or permanent pacemaker implantation

    Determine factors associated with sudden death or permanent pacemaker implantation during the follow-up period overall and in each algorithm group

    Time frame: At 1-year follow-up

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Puri R, Chamandi C, Rodriguez-Gabella T, Rodes-Cabau J. Future of transcatheter aortic valve implantation - evolving clinical indications. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2018 Jan;15(1):57-65. doi: 10.1038/nrcardio.2017.116. Epub 2017 Aug 24. PubMed 28836620 ↗
  • Kolte D, Vlahakes GJ, Palacios IF, Sakhuja R, Passeri JJ, Inglessis I, Elmariah S. Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Sep 24;74(12):1532-1540. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.06.076. PubMed 31537261 ↗
  • Auffret V, Lefevre T, Van Belle E, Eltchaninoff H, Iung B, Koning R, Motreff P, Leprince P, Verhoye JP, Manigold T, Souteyrand G, Boulmier D, Joly P, Pinaud F, Himbert D, Collet JP, Rioufol G, Ghostine S, Bar O, Dibie A, Champagnac D, Leroux L, Collet F, Teiger E, Darremont O, Folliguet T, Leclercq F, Lhermusier T, Olhmann P, Huret B, Lorgis L, Drogoul L, Bertrand B, Spaulding C, Quilliet L, Cuisset T, Delomez M, Beygui F, Claudel JP, Hepp A, Jegou A, Gommeaux A, Mirode A, Christiaens L, Christophe C, Cassat C, Metz D, Mangin L, Isaaz K, Jacquemin L, Guyon P, Pouillot C, Makowski S, Bataille V, Rodes-Cabau J, Gilard M, Le Breton H; FRANCE TAVI Investigators. Temporal Trends in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in France: FRANCE 2 to FRANCE TAVI. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Jul 4;70(1):42-55. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.04.053. PubMed 28662806 ↗
  • Auffret V, Puri R, Urena M, Chamandi C, Rodriguez-Gabella T, Philippon F, Rodes-Cabau J. Conduction Disturbances After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Current Status and Future Perspectives. Circulation. 2017 Sep 12;136(11):1049-1069. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.028352. PubMed 28893961 ↗
  • van Rosendael PJ, Delgado V, Bax JJ. Pacemaker implantation rate after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with early and new-generation devices: a systematic review. Eur Heart J. 2018 Jun 1;39(21):2003-2013. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx785. PubMed 29420704 ↗
  • Cerrato E, Nombela-Franco L, Nazif TM, Eltchaninoff H, Sondergaard L, Ribeiro HB, Barbanti M, Nietlispach F, De Jaegere P, Agostoni P, Trillo R, Jimenez-Quevedo P, D'Ascenzo F, Wendler O, Maluenda G, Chen M, Tamburino C, Macaya C, Leon MB, Rodes-Cabau J. Evaluation of current practices in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: The WRITTEN (WoRldwIde TAVI ExperieNce) survey. Int J Cardiol. 2017 Feb 1;228:640-647. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.11.104. Epub 2016 Nov 9. PubMed 27883975 ↗
  • Rodes-Cabau J, Ellenbogen KA, Krahn AD, Latib A, Mack M, Mittal S, Muntane-Carol G, Nazif TM, Sondergaard L, Urena M, Windecker S, Philippon F. Management of Conduction Disturbances Associated With Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: JACC Scientific Expert Panel. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Aug 27;74(8):1086-1106. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.07.014. PubMed 31439219 ↗
  • Kusumoto FM, Schoenfeld MH, Barrett C, Edgerton JR, Ellenbogen KA, Gold MR, Goldschlager NF, Hamilton RM, Joglar JA, Kim RJ, Lee R, Marine JE, McLeod CJ, Oken KR, Patton KK, Pellegrini CN, Selzman KA, Thompson A, Varosy PD. 2018 ACC/AHA/HRS Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Patients With Bradycardia and Cardiac Conduction Delay: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines, and the Heart Rhythm Society. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Aug 20;74(7):932-987. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.10.043. Epub 2018 Nov 6. No abstract available. PubMed 30412710 ↗
  • Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Genereux P, Piazza N, van Mieghem NM, Blackstone EH, Brott TG, Cohen DJ, Cutlip DE, van Es GA, Hahn RT, Kirtane AJ, Krucoff MW, Kodali S, Mack MJ, Mehran R, Rodes-Cabau J, Vranckx P, Webb JG, Windecker S, Serruys PW, Leon MB. Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document. Eur Heart J. 2012 Oct;33(19):2403-18. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs255. PubMed 23026477 ↗
  • Fischer Q, Nombela-Franco L, Muntane-Carol G, Veiga G, Regueiro A, Nazif T, Serra V, Asmarats L, Ribeiro HB, Latib A, Poulin A, Cheema AN, Tirado-Conte G, Gomez-Hospital JA, Gil Ongay A, Gabani R, Arzamendi D, Brener M, Calabuig A, Scotti A, Gelain MAS, Labinaz M, Cepas-Guillen P, Cote M, Del Portillo JH, Philippon F, Rodes-Cabau J. Prophylactic Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2025 Nov;11(11):2484-2492. doi: 10.1016/j.jacep.2025.07.028. Epub 2025 Sep 17. PubMed 40965381 ↗
  • Fischer Q, Nombela-Franco L, Muntane-Carol G, Veiga G, Regueiro A, Nazif T, Serra V, Asmarats L, Ribeiro HB, Latib A, Poulin A, Cheema AN, Jimenez-Quevedo P, Gomez-Hospital JA, Gil Ongay A, Ruberti A, Arzamendi D, Brener M, Calabuig A, Scotti A, Gelain MAS, Labinaz M, Cepas-Guillen P, Cote M, Del Portillo JH, Philippon F, Rodes-Cabau J. Risk of delayed atrioventricular block in patients without procedural conduction disturbances during transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Heart Rhythm. 2026 Apr;23(4):955-962. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2025.04.017. Epub 2025 Apr 14. PubMed 40239910 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Feb 2020 to primary completion in Dec 2025, 70 months.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Oct 21, 2019
First posted
Oct 25, 2019
StartActual
Feb 25, 2020
Primary completionActual
Dec 25, 2025
CompletionEst.
Dec 25, 2027
Last update
Jun 1, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 1, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04139616
Lead sponsor
Centre de Recherche de l'Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Quebec
Responsible party
Josep Rodes-Cabau (Principal Investigator, Centre de Recherche de l'Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Quebec) — Principal investigator
First posted
Oct 25, 2019
Start date
Feb 25, 2020
Primary completion
Dec 25, 2025
Completion
Dec 25, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Jun 1, 2026

Study contacts

Josep Rodes-Cabau, MD
Contact
josep.rodes@criucpq.ulaval.ca
418-656-8711
Melanie Cote, MSc
Contact
melanie.cote@criucpq.ulaval.ca
418-656-8711 ext. 2646

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion