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
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.
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.
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 →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.
Exclusion Criteria:
Single VF zone programming strategy with maximal detection extension to avoid ICD shock delivery with monitoring-only VT detection zones
Other: ICD programming
Usual care ICD programming, which is historically unchanged from ICD programming pre-LVAD
Re-programming of the ICD device for VA detection (see above)
ICD shock delivery
Number of patients with ICD shock delivery
Time frame: Up to 24 months
Mortality
Incidence of all-cause death
Time frame: Up to 24 Months
Syncope
Individual occurrence of loss of consciousness
Time frame: Up to 24 Months
Time to first ICD shock
Interval of time from baseline to first appropriate/non-appropriate ICD shock
Time frame: Up to 24 Months
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
Standard INTERMACS survey
Quality of life measured by INTERMACS survey scored from 1 to 7
Time frame: Up to 24 Months
Hospitalization
Individual occurrence of hospitalization
Time frame: Up to 24 Months
Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.
Plan to share: No
This study is terminated, as verified in Jun 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions 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.
The Cleveland Clinic