ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04409119HIS-alt_2Updated Feb 12, 2026

Direct HIS/LBB Pacing as an Alternative to Biventricular Pacing in Patients With HFrEF and a Typical LBBB.

An interventional study of HIS/LBB pacing and LV pacing in Heart Failure and Left Bundle-Branch Block, sponsored by Rigshospitalet, Denmark. Completed at 1 site in Denmark. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-02-12.

Sponsored by Rigshospitalet, Denmark · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
150
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The study will investigate the feasibility of using direct HIS pacing or left bundle branch pacing (LBB pacing) as an alternative to biventricular pacing in patients with symptomatic heart failure and an ECG with a typical left bundle branch block pattern.

Read the detailed description

Biventricular pacing has for more than a decade been standard of care for patients with HFrEF, LVEF \< 35%, NYHA II-IV despite optimal medical treatment and an ECG with left bundle branch block (LBBB). However, it is not always ideal because of several drawbacks such as phrenic nerve capture, inability to reach late activated areas and many more. Direct HIS pacing can in many cases capture the left bundle and provide normal electrical activation of the left ventricle but sometimes with high pacing thresholds. Recently direct left bundle branch pacing has shown promise with synchronous activation of the left ventricle at low pacing thresholds.

In the present study we randomize 150 patients in two centres to either conventional CRT (50 patients) or HIS/LBB pacing (100 patients). In the HIS/LBB arm, direct HIS-pacing is attempted first but if its not possible or the pacing threshold for capturing the left bundle branch is > 2.5 V at 1 ms we switch to placing a LBB-lead.

Power calculation for non-inferiority: With the 50 patients in the first His Alternative study (25 Biv-CRT og 25 His-CRT) we observed a fall in systolic volumes of 34% and 46% with a standard deviation of 13-16%. Using these numbers it would take at least 108 patients to be 90% sure that the lower limit of a one-sided 97.5% confidence interval (equal to a 95% two-sided confidence interval) would be over the non-inferiority limit of -10%.

02

Conditions studied

  • Heart Failure
  • Left Bundle-Branch Block

Keywords

  • left bundle branch block
  • HIS-pacing
  • LBB-pacing
  • left bundle branch pacing
03

In context

Heart Failure

6,331 studies on the registry are indexed under Heart Failure; 1,396 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 150 is above the median of 76 across 4,049 interventional studies indexed under Heart Failure.

Browse Heart Failure studies →

Lead sponsor

Rigshospitalet, Denmark is the lead sponsor of 1,007 studies on the registry; 175 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
No

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 over 18 years of age, ischemic or non-ischemic cardiomyopathy with ≤ 35% assessed by echocardiography, class II-IV heart failure symptoms despite optimal medical treatment and

    • Either planned new implantation of a biventricular pacing system (CRT-P or CRT-D), where the is with sinus rhythm and a typical left bundle branch block (see definition below)
    • Or planned upgrade of an existing pacemaker or ICD to a biventricular pacing system (CRT-P or CRT-D), where the ECG is with sinus rhythm and a typical left bundle branch block or there has been> 90% right ventricular pacing from an existing pacemaker for at least 2 months prior to enrollment
  • Signed

Typical left bundle branch block:

QRS width > 130 msec for women and > 140 msec for men QS or rS pattern in leads V1 and V2, and mid-QRS plateau phase with or without extras in at least 2 of leads V1, V2, V5, V6, I, and aVL

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Existing biventricular pacing system
  • Permanent atrial fibrillation
  • Severe renal failure with \< 30 ml/min
  • AMI or CABG within the last three months
  • The patient does not want to participate
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(5)

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.

LVEF (left ventricular ejection fraction)

The share of blood the heart’s main pumping chamber (the left ventricle) pushes out with each beat, measured by an echocardiogram (heart ultrasound) or a MUGA scan. About 50–70% is normal.

NYHA class (heart failure)

The New York Heart Association’s four classes of how much heart failure limits physical activity.

I
No limits: ordinary activity causes no undue tiredness or breathlessness.
II
Slight limits: comfortable at rest, ordinary activity causes symptoms.
III
Marked limits: comfortable at rest, less than ordinary activity causes symptoms.
IV
Symptoms even at rest; any activity makes them worse.

Studies set their own limit — many outside heart failure leave out class III–IV, while heart failure studies may ask for a particular class. Check the class this study names.

ECG (electrocardiogram)

A recording of the heart’s electrical activity, taken with stickers on the chest, arms and legs. It takes a few minutes and does not hurt.

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.

GFR and eGFR (kidney filtering)

GFR (glomerular filtration rate) is how much blood the kidneys filter each minute. It is usually estimated from a blood test — eGFR, by formulas such as CKD-EPI or MDRD — and some studies ask for it to be measured directly instead. Usually given in mL/min/1.73 m².

Check the method, the units and the minimum the study states. A value of 90 or above is in the normal-or-high range, but kidney damage can show in other tests too.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
150 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    HIS/LBB pacing

    In this arm a right ventricular (RV) lead or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) lead is placed first and then implantation of a HIS-pacing lead is attempted. If it is not possible to find and pace HIS, to correct the LBBB or the threshold for correcting the LBBB is \> 2.5 V at 1 ms, implantation of a LBB-pacing lead is attempted instead. If that is not possible either, a left ventricular (LV) lead is implanted.

    Device: HIS/LBB pacing

  • Active comparator
    LV pacing

    In this arm an RV-lead or ICD-lead is placed first and then implantation of a LV-pacing lead is attempted. If this is not possible due to anatomical difficulties (no coronary sinus (CS) access, no available branches other than v cordis anterior or v cordis media) or electrical difficulties (no capture below 4 V at 1.0 msec or phrenic nerve stimulation \< 2x pacing threshold), implantation of a HIS-pacing lead is attempted instead. If that is not possible or the threshold for correcting the LBBB is \> 2.5 V at 1 ms, implantation of a LBB-pacing lead is attempted instead.

    Device: LV pacing

Interventions

  • DeviceHIS/LBB pacing

    3830 lead to HIS or LBB

  • DeviceLV pacing

    LV lead in a CS branch

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in Left ventricular end-systolic volume

    Echocardiographic response after 6 months defined as decrease in left ventricular systolic volume

    Time frame: 6 months

  2. Success rate of implanting a HIS-bundle lead with capture of the left bundle branch or a LBB-lead with narrowing of QRS

    The success rate of implanting a pacing lead to the HIS-bundle with capture of the left bundle at a threshold \< 2.5 V at 1 ms or implantation of a LBB lead with narrowing of the QRS duration and maintaining this effect at 6 month follow-up

    Time frame: 6 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in LVEF and left ventricular chamber dimensions

    Echocardiographic response assessed by chamber dimensions and LVEF on a continuous scale

    Time frame: 6 months

  2. Change in 6-min hall-walk test

    Functional response after 6 months defined as an increase in 6-min walking distance of ≥ 20% of the initial value

    Time frame: 6 months

  3. Change in NYHA class

    Symptomatic response after 6 months defined as a fall in NYHA class of ≥ 1

    Time frame: 6 months

  4. Change in Minnesota Living with Heart Failure score

    Change in well-being after 6 months defined as a decrease in Minnesota Living With Heart Failure score of ≥ 15% of baseline

    Time frame: 6 months

  5. Shortening of QRS duration

    Shortening the duration of the QRS complex defined as the widest paced QRS complex rated at 12-lead ECG after 6 months

    Time frame: 6 months

  6. Change in NT-pro BNP value

    Change in NT-pro BNP value

    Time frame: 6 months

  7. Complications

    Device-related complications (periprocedural: electrode reoperation, pneumothorax, hemothorax, pericardial bleeding/tamponade and later (after 30 days post implantation): LV/HIS electrode reoperation, change of device due to battery depletion and infection requiring extraction).

    Time frame: 6 months

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Rigshospitalet
    Copenhagen, Capital Region 2100, Denmark
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Risum N, Philbert BT, Svendsen JH, Linde JJ, Winslow U, Saffi H, Frandsen EA, Zuhair M, Whinnett Z, Keene D, Vinther M. Direct His/LBB pacing as an alternative to biventricular pacing in patients with HFrEF and a typical LBBB: Design and rationale for the His-Alternative II trial. Am Heart J. 2026 Oct;300:107491. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2026.107491. Epub 2026 May 20. PubMed 42167711 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Ran from Jun 2020 to primary completion in Feb 2026, 68 months.

Of 1,118 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Heart Failure, half reached primary completion within 29 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 16 and three quarters within 50. This study's 68 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 1,354 studies reached it within 31 months; a quarter within 16 and three quarters within 52.

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

Registered
May 26, 2020
First posted
Jun 1, 2020
StartActual
Jun 1, 2020
Primary completionActual
Feb 1, 2026
CompletionActual
Feb 1, 2026
Last update
Feb 12, 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 Feb 12, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04409119
Collaborators
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust
Responsible party
Michael Vinther (Chief Physician Electrophysiology, Rigshospitalet, Denmark) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jun 1, 2020
Start date
Jun 1, 2020
Primary completion
Feb 1, 2026
Completion
Feb 1, 2026
Last update
Feb 12, 2026

Study contacts

Michael Vinther, MD PhD
principal investigator · Rigshospitalet, Denmark

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 completed, as verified in Feb 2026. 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