CClinicalTrials.gg
TerminatedNCT04264182Updated Jun 8, 2022

STandardized Ultra-conservative Or Physician-directed ICD Programming for Continuous Flow LVAD Support

An interventional study of ICD programming in Heart Failure, Systolic, Left Ventricular Assist Device and ICD, sponsored by The Cleveland Clinic. Terminated at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-06-08.

Sponsored by The Cleveland Clinic · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Why this study was terminated
Difficult to enroll patients into the study
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
11
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study will evaluate the utilization of an ultra-conservative programming strategy to reduce shocks for ventricular arrhythmias (VA) among patients with heart failure, an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and continuous flow (CF) left ventricular assist device (LVAD). Patients on LVAD support demonstrate unique hemodynamic tolerability of VA, and the role for ICDs among patients with newer generation CF LVADs remains less clear than the older generation devices. Prior studies have explored extended detection ICD programming to reduce unecessary or potentially avoidable shocks to patients. However, no prospective randomized study to-date has evaluated such programming strategies in the CF LVAD patient population. The study hypothesis is that ultra-conservative (UC) ICD programming will result in a reduction of shocks and an improvement in quality of life without increasing hospitalizations, syncope or death among patients on CF LVAD support, and the primary design is a 1:1 randomization between UC programming over standard, physician discretion programming.

Read the detailed description

The current International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) guidelines provide a class I recommendation for tachy-therapy re-activation in patients with ICDs undergoing LVAD implantation. However, these guidelines reflect a survival benefit observed in cohorts comprised primarily of older-generation pulsatile flow LVADs. While the overall VA prevalence in the LVAD population exceeds 50% with VA usually occurring >200 beats per minute, VA are generally well-tolerated both hemodynamically and symptomatically. Observed LVAD flows do decrease during sustained VA but there are multiple case reports of LVAD patients remaining awake and asymptomatic despite hours of ventricular fibrillation and a large case series reported no deaths and rare syncope due to VA in CF LVAD patients. Contrary to guidelines, contemporary evaluations restricted to CF LVADs show no clear ICD survival benefit in single center studies nor a large, pooled meta-analysis. In fact, propensity-matched analyses of CF LVAD patients in the INTERMACS and UNOS registries have demonstrated increased mortality and more hospitalizations among patients with an active ICD and treated VA. It is unclear in the CF LVAD population whether ICD shocks themselves are harmful or rather identify a higher-acuity patient subgroup. In the general HF population, however, shocks have consistently been associated with worse outcomes. Shock reduction programming resulted in reduced mortality in the MADIT-RIT trial, suggesting shocks may be directly harmful and not only a marker of substrate.

Therefore, the present study will evaluate whether ultra-conservative (UC) programming for ICDs can reduce shocks over standard (physician-discretion) programming among patients with heart failure on CF LVAD support. The model is 1:1 randomization between the two programming strategies for patients with newly implanted CF LVAD devices and a pre-existing ICD. They will be eligible for enrollment during their index hospitalization, and after discharge up to their first outpatient follow-up visit no later than 3 months post discharge. The primary endpoints will be any ICD shock, all-cause mortality, and syncope. The secondary endpoints will be time to first ICD shock, time to first ICD shock for VT/VF, quality of life questionnaire and hospitalizations, including for heart failure and ventricular arrhythmias. The principal exclusion criteria will be pediatric patients, or those without a functional ICD system. Standard of care follow-up will continue thru 24 months.

02

Conditions studied

  • Heart Failure, Systolic
  • Left Ventricular Assist Device
  • ICD

Keywords

  • LVAD
  • ICD
  • Shock
  • Ventricular arrhythmia
03

In context

Heart Failure, Systolic

227 studies on the registry are indexed under Heart Failure, Systolic; 50 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 11 is below the median of 60 across 162 interventional studies indexed under Heart Failure, Systolic.

Browse Heart Failure, Systolic studies →

Lead sponsor

The Cleveland Clinic is the lead sponsor of 818 studies on the registry; 118 are open to participants now.

Of its 89 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 72 (81%) have results posted.

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
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Pre-existing ICD
  • LVAD placement

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Non-functional ICD system
  • Uncontrolled ventricular arrhythmias within 7 days of enrollment (defined as VT/VF >30 seconds and/or causing hemodynamic instability and/or symptoms of pre-syncope or syncope)
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
11 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Ultra-conservative ICD programming

    Single VF zone programming strategy with maximal detection extension to avoid ICD shock delivery with monitoring-only VT detection zones

    Other: ICD programming

  • No intervention
    Standard programming (physician discretion)

    Usual care ICD programming, which is historically unchanged from ICD programming pre-LVAD

Interventions

  • OtherICD programming

    Re-programming of the ICD device for VA detection (see above)

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. ICD shock delivery

    Number of patients with ICD shock delivery

    Time frame: Up to 24 months

  2. Mortality

    Incidence of all-cause death

    Time frame: Up to 24 Months

  3. Syncope

    Individual occurrence of loss of consciousness

    Time frame: Up to 24 Months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Time to first ICD shock

    Interval of time from baseline to first appropriate/non-appropriate ICD shock

    Time frame: Up to 24 Months

  2. Time to first ICD shock for VT/VF (appropriate shock)

    Interval of time from baseline to first ICD shock for VT/VF (appropriate shock)

    Time frame: Up to 24 Months

  3. Standard INTERMACS survey

    Quality of life measured by INTERMACS survey scored from 1 to 7

    Time frame: Up to 24 Months

  4. Hospitalization

    Individual occurrence of hospitalization

    Time frame: Up to 24 Months

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Cleveland Clinic
    Cleveland, Ohio 44195, United States
08

References and documents

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · May 29, 2019
  • Informed consent form · Jun 20, 2019

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 8, 2022, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04264182
Lead sponsor
The Cleveland Clinic
Responsible party
Dan Cantillon (Principal Investigator, The Cleveland Clinic) — Principal investigator
First posted
Feb 11, 2020
Start date
Feb 3, 2020
Primary completion
Apr 4, 2022
Completion
Apr 4, 2022
Last update
Jun 8, 2022

Study contacts

Daniel Cantillon, M. D.
principal investigator · The Cleveland Clinic

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is terminated, as verified in Jun 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

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