ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06324682TREEBEARDUpdated Mar 22, 2024

ConTempoRary Cardiac Stimulation in Clinical practicE: lEft, BivEntriculAr, Right, and conDuction System Pacing

An observational study in Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Atrioventricular Block and Reduced Systolic Function, sponsored by University Hospital of Ferrara. Recruiting at 31 sites in Italy. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-03-22.

Sponsored by University Hospital of Ferrara · Observational

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Jan 2023; still recruiting 3 years 10 months later.
Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
8,400
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The goal of this observational study is to evaluate the clinical characteristics of patients undergoing permanent cardiac pacing and to compare procedural efficacy and safety of different implantation approaches in the clinical practice of the participating centres. The contribution of non-fluoroscopic anatomical and electrophysiological reconstruction systems to device implantation procedures will also be evaluated.

Participants [patients over 18 years old with an indication to receive a definitive pacemaker/intracardiac defibrillator implant] will receive a permanent cardiac pacing implant as requested according to European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines; the investigators will evaluate procedural efficacy and safety of different implantation approaches.

Read the detailed description

Cardiac pacing with implantable electronic cardiac devices and transvenous leads has been introduced since 1960 and is considered a safe, effective and low-risk therapy. The most common indications for permanent cardiac pacing are sinus node dysfunction and atrioventricular blocks. In Europe, pacemaker implants exceed 1000 per million inhabitants. The aim of this therapy is not only to improve patients survival but also their quality of life, which is an essential aspect in assessing patients clinical status and prognosis.

Nowadays, five types of cardiac pacing are recognised in clinical practice:

  • Endocardial right chambers pacing: the device is implanted in the subcutaneous subclavian area and it is connected to transvenous leads implanted in the right cardiac chambers, which detect intrinsic electrical activity and stimulate when needed;
  • Epicardial pacing: this procedure is often performed in conjunction with cardiac surgery;
  • Cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT): it delivers biventricular or left ventricular pacing in order to correct interventricular electromechanical dyssynchrony and to improve cardiac output;
  • Conduction system pacing: it stimulates the His bundle or the left bundle branch area downstream of the conduction block, in order to restore a physiological electromechanical activation.
  • Leadless pacing: via a percutaneous approach through a large-calibre vein, leadless device is placed inside the right ventricle.

These pacing modalities have different possibilities to restore a normal cardiac electromechanical activation, resulting in different degrees of mechanical efficiency in terms of systolic output and diastolic pressures, with consequent effects on improvement/onset of heart failure and cardiopulmonary performance of our patients.

Right ventricular pacing induces a dyssynchronous cardiac activation pattern that can lead to left systolic dysfunction and a consequent increased risk of death related to the development of heart failure.

These observations led to the study of alternative cardiac pacing modalities since the 1990s, in order to improve the clinical outcome of patients with symptomatic bradyarrhythmias. The study of pathological ventricular activation due to left bundle-branch block represents the pathophysiological premise of cardiac resynchronisation in patients with systolic dysfunctional heart failure, and constitutes the developmental model for physiological pacing.

CRT improves mortality and quality of life in patients with heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. Typically left ventricular pacing is achieved by placing a catheter in the posterolateral area through a venous branch of the coronary sinus. Unfortunately, despite several years of experience in this field, clinical non-response to this therapy is observed in between 20% and 40% of patients, mostly due to the inability to reach the appropriate pacing site because of anatomical difficulties/absence of veins in the target area.

Recently, conduction system pacing (CSP) has rapidly emerged as an alternative pacing modality to both right ventricular pacing (RVP) and CRT, in order to achieve a more physiological pacing. His bundle pacing (HBP) is considered the physiological pacing "par excellence", but the results in literature show rather frequent technical difficulties due to high pacing thresholds, inadequate ventricular signal amplitude for the detection of intrinsic cardiac activity, low success rate and risk of progression of conduction system pathology in patients with infranodal conduction defects.

Left bundle area pacing has more recently emerged as a viable alternative to achieve physiological pacing with haemodynamic parameters similar to those of HBP, but with lower and stable pacing thresholds, ventricular signal amplitude adequate for the detection of intrinsic cardiac activity and high success rate.

Several experiences with different pacing systems have been published, mainly single-centre studies with small sample sizes and different definitions of conduction system pacing success.

In non-randomised comparative studies, and thus with methodological limitations, clinical superiority over conventional right ventricular pacing, and a substantial efficacy equivalent to CRT in patients with left bundle-branch block, has been shown, creating the preconditions for widespread use of the CSP.

Considering, therefore, the widespread use of the latter technique and the high rate of implants that can potentially benefit from physiological pacing, evaluating safety, feasibility, timing and benefits becomes more crucial than ever.

Therefore, the goal of this observational study is to evaluate the clinical characteristics of patients undergoing permanent cardiac pacing and to compare procedural efficacy and safety of different implantation approaches in the clinical practice of the participating centres.

The contribution of non-fluoroscopic anatomical and electrophysiological reconstruction systems to device implantation procedures will also be evaluated.

The investigators will collect clinical and procedural data from patients with an indication for permanent cardiac pacing who have consecutively undergone an implantable electronic device implant procedure at the Electrophysiology Laboratories of the participating centres over a period of 120 months from the time of approval with a follow-up of an equal 120 months.

Patients will be classified according to the type of stimulation:

  1. Right chambers endocardial pacing;
  2. Cardiac resynchronisation therapy;
  3. Conduction system pacing:

    1. His bundle pacing
    2. Left bundle branch area pacing. In addition, the efficacy and safety at 30 days, and the efficacy and safety at 6 and 12 months of the various pacing modalities, will be evaluated.

The investigators defined efficacy at 30 days the presence of stable electrical parameters - or, if unstable, not requiring early re-intervention, the absence of cardiovascular hospitalizations and the absence of cardiovascular death.

The investigators defined safety at 30 days the absence of procedural complications, such as haematoma requiring re-intervention or with haemoglobin loss >2gr/dl, pneumothorax, pericardial effusion requiring drainage, lead dislocation, cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection or a re-intervention for any cause.

Equally, the investigators defined efficacy at 6-12 months the presence of stable electrical parameters - or, if unstable, not requiring re-intervention, the absence of cardiovascular hospitalizations, the absence of cardiovascular death, the occurrence of heart failure, the occurrence or worsening of atrial or ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

Therefore, the investigators defined safety at 6-12 months the proper functioning of the device, the absence of infection and the absence of re-intervention for any cause.

02

Conditions studied

  • Arrhythmias, Cardiac
  • Atrioventricular Block
  • Reduced Systolic Function
  • Atrial Fibrillation
  • Bradyarrhythmia
  • Ventricular Tachycardia
  • Ventricular Dysfunction
  • Ventricular Fibrillation
  • Ventricular Arrythmia
  • Atrioventricular Nodal Disease
  • Atrioventricular Conduction Defects
  • Atrioventricular Block Complete
  • Atrioventricular Block Incomplete
  • Atrioventricular Junctional Rhythm
  • Bundle-Branch Block
  • Left Bundle-Branch Block
  • Heart Failure, Systolic
  • Block;Atrioventricular
  • Block; Arrhythmic
  • Block; Mobitz
  • Block, Heart
  • Block, Fascicular
  • Block Branch Bundle Left
  • Heart Failure,Congestive
  • Heart Arrhythmia

Keywords

  • Pace maker (PM)
  • Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD)
  • Atrioventricular Block
  • Bradyarrhythmia
  • Ventricular Dysfunction
  • Cardiac Resynchronization therapy
  • Conduction System Pacing
  • His Pacing
  • Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP)
  • CRT
  • CSP
  • Primary prevention
  • Secondary prevention
  • Atrioventricular Block Complete
  • Heart failure
  • Ventricular Arrythmia
  • Ventricular Fibrillation
  • Ventricular Tachycardia
03

In context

Arrhythmias, Cardiac

1,051 studies on the registry are indexed under Arrhythmias, Cardiac; 236 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 8,400 is above the median of 200 across 467 observational studies indexed under Arrhythmias, Cardiac.

Browse Arrhythmias, Cardiac studies →

Lead sponsor

University Hospital of Ferrara is the lead sponsor of 114 studies on the registry; 28 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
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Patients with an indication for permanent cardiac stimulation who have subsequently undergone an implantation procedure for an implantable electronic device at the Electrophysiology Laboratories of participating centers within a period of 120 months from the time of approval, with a corresponding follow-up period of another 120 months.

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

  • Indication for cardiac stimulation
  • Having performed the implantation of a device for cardiac stimulation

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Age \< 18 years;
  • Pregnancy status;
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
8,400 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Conventional right ventricular (RV) pacing

    The device (pace maker or implantable cardiac defibrillator) is implanted in the subcutaneous subclavian area (right or left) and it is connected to transvenous lead/leads (active or passive) implanted in the right cardiac chambers (atrium and ventricle or ventricle only), which detect intrinsic electrical activity and stimulate when needed. The ventricle pacing might be obtained with an apical or septal stimulation. Vascular access might be from the cephalic, axillary or subclavian veins. Once positioned, lead's pacing threshold, sensing and impedance are measured. If the investigators find good and stable electrical parameters, the catheter(s) is(are) fixed and left in place.

    Device: Cardiac pacing - Conventional RV pacing

  • Conduction System Pacing

    The approach for the insertion of the device and of the transvenous leads is similar to the previous ones. The ventricle activation might be obtained with the his bundle stimulation or with the left bundle branch area pacing downstream of the conduction block. Vascular access might be from the cephalic, axillary or subclavian veins. Both selective and non-selective stimulation of the His bundle and the stimulation of the left bundle branch and left septum are considered successful. In both cases, attempts are made to locate the atrio-ventricular junction by fluoroscopic methods or with three-dimensional electroanatomical mapping system. The Hisian potential is sought and the catheter is positioned. In the LBBAP the investigators place the lead 1.5 cm below the His region and, with the pacemaking method, the investigators identify an area that electrocardiographically shows a W signal in V1 lead with D2 more positive than D3 - after checking the electrical parameters.

    Device: Cardiac pacing - Conduction System Pacing

  • Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) either -pacing (CRTP) or -defibrillation (CRTD)

    The approach for the insertion of the device and of the transvenous leads is similar to the previous ones. The right ventricle pacing (with a pacing lead or a defibrillation coil) might be obtained with an apical or septal stimulation, while the left ventricular pacing is achieved by placing a catheter (active or passive) in the posterolateral area through a venous branch of the coronary sinus. Cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) delivers biventricular or left ventricular only pacing. Vascular access might be from the cephalic, axillary or subclavian veins. Once positioned, lead's pacing threshold, sensing and impedance are measured. If the investigators find good and stable electrical parameters, the catheter(s) is(are) fixed and left in place - paying attention to the phrenic nerve capture threshold.

    Device: Cardiac pacing - Cardiac resynchronization therapy (pacing - CRTP - or defibrillation - CRTD)

  • Epicardial pacing

    The device is usually placed in the subcutaneous abdominal area and the lead(s) is(are) secured in the epicardial surface. It is often used in congenital heart defects or post-cardiac surgery scenarios. Surgeons may access the epicardium during open-heart surgery or with minimally invasive techniques.

    Device: Cardiac pacing - Epicardial pacing

  • Leadless pacing

    The leadless device is placed via a percutaneous approach through a large-calibre (femoral) vein inside the right ventricle. It is suitable for patients needing a single chamber pacing such as patients with permanent atrial fibrillation with slow ventricular response, in some cases of paroxysmal atrioventricular block, or patients with a history of CIED infections. The only one currently available has a cardiac muscle fixation system consisting of 4 self-expanding barbs. Once positioned, pacing threshold, sensing and impedance are measured. If the investigators find good and stable electrical parameters, the catheter is left in place.

    Device: Cardiac pacing - Leadless pacing

Interventions

  • DeviceCardiac pacing - Conventional RV pacing

    Implantation of devices for cardiac pacing/defibrillation

    Also known as: Cardiac defibrillation - Conventional RV pacing

  • DeviceCardiac pacing - Conduction System Pacing

    Implantation of devices for cardiac pacing/defibrillation

    Also known as: Cardiac defibrillation - Conduction System Pacing

  • DeviceCardiac pacing - Cardiac resynchronization therapy (pacing - CRTP - or defibrillation - CRTD)

    Implantation of devices for cardiac pacing/defibrillation

    Also known as: Cardiac defibrillation - Cardiac resynchronization therapy (pacing - CRTP - or defibrillation - CRTD)

  • DeviceCardiac pacing - Epicardial pacing

    Implantation of devices for cardiac pacing/defibrillation

    Also known as: Cardiac defibrillation - Epicardial pacing

  • DeviceCardiac pacing - Leadless pacing

    Implantation of devices for cardiac pacing/defibrillation

    Also known as: Cardiac defibrillation - Leadless pacing

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. 30 days efficacy

    Number of successful implantations, defined as the achievement of the planned pacing modality

    Time frame: 30 days

  2. Rate of hospitalizations for heart failure at 12 months

    The investigators considered the worsening of heart failure requiring hospital management

    Time frame: 12 months

  3. All cause death at 12 months

    The investigators will monitor patient's all causes death

    Time frame: 12 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. All cause and cardiovascular death at 1, 3, 5, 10 years

    The investigators will monitor patient's all causes and cardiovascular death

    Time frame: 120 months

  2. Onset/worsening of heart failure

    The investigators will assess patient's hemodynamic stability over the years, monitoring the onset or the worsening of heart failure

    Time frame: 120 months

  3. Onset/worsening of atrial tachyarrhythmias

    The investigators will monitor patient's rhythm over the years, assessing the onset or the worsening of atrial tachyarrhythmias.

    Time frame: 120 months

  4. Onset/worsening of ventricular tachyarrhythmias

    The investigators will monitor patient's rhythm over the years, assessing the onset or the worsening of ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

    Time frame: 120 months

  5. Procedural time

    The investigators will evaluate procedural time of different cardiac pacing modalities

    Time frame: implantation procedure

  6. Fluoroscopy time

    The investigators will evaluate fluoroscopy time of different cardiac pacing modalities

    Time frame: implantation procedure

  7. Radiation exposure

    The investigators will evaluate radiation exposure of different cardiac pacing modalities monitoring the dose area product

    Time frame: implantation procedure

  8. Success rate of CRT in heart failure

    The investigators consider successful CRT if obtain a left ventricular end-systolic volume reduction \>15%

    Time frame: 120 months

  9. Cardiac perforation rate

    The investigators will evaluate how often cardiac perforation occurs in relation to the total number of implants and in the various pacing modalities

    Time frame: 30 days

  10. Hemothorax rate

    The investigators will evaluate how often hemothorax occurs in relation to the total number of implants and in the various pacing modalities

    Time frame: 30 days

  11. Pneumothorax rate

    The investigators will evaluate how often pneumothorax occurs in relation to the total number of implants and in the various pacing modalities

    Time frame: 30 days

  12. Pocket hematoma rate

    The investigators will evaluate how often pocket hematoma occurs in relation to the total number of implants and in the various pacing modalities

    Time frame: 30 days

  13. Pericardial effusion rate

    The investigators will evaluate how often pericardial effusion occurs in relation to the total number of implants and in the various pacing modalities

    Time frame: 30 days

  14. Lead dislocation rate

    The investigators will evaluate how often catheter dislocation occurs in relation to the total number of implants and in the various pacing modalities

    Time frame: 120 months

  15. Lead fracture rate

    The investigators will evaluate how often catheter rupture occurs in relation to the total number of implants and in the various pacing modalities

    Time frame: 120 months

  16. Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices infections rate

    The investigators will evaluate how often infections occur in relation to the total number of implants and in the various pacing modalities

    Time frame: 120 months

  17. Reintervention rate

    The investigators will evaluate how often reintervention is needed in relation to the total number of implants and in the various pacing modalities

    Time frame: 120 months

07

Study locations

31 of 31 sites recruiting
  • Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Ferrara
    Ferrara, FE 44124, Italy
    Recruiting
  • Ospedale San Donato
    Arezzo, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Pasquale Notarstefano, MD · Contact
  • Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria S.Orsola-Malpighi Bologna
    Bologna, 40138, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Mauro Biffi, MD · Contact
  • spedale Maggiore di Bologna
    Bologna, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Valeria Carinci, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale Bernardino Ramazzini
    Carpi, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Elia De Maria, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale SS Annunziata
    Cento, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Biagio Sassone, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale Bufalini
    Cesena, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Paolo Sabbatani, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale San Giuseppe
    Empoli, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Attilio Del Rosso, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale di Vaio
    Fidenza, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Paolo Pastori · Contact
  • Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi
    Firenze, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Giuseppe Ricciardi, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale San Giovanni di Dio
    Firenze, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Iacopo Bertolozzi, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale Santa Maria Annunziata Bagno a Ripoli
    Firenze, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Maria Giaccardi, MD · Contact
  • Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria "Ospedali Riuniti"
    Foggia, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Pier Luigi Pellegrino, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale Morgagni-Pierantoni
    Forlì, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Alberto Bandini, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale Santa Maria della Misericordia Grosseto
    Grosseto, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Gennaro Miracapillo, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale della Versilia
    Lido Di Camaiore, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Gianluca Solarino, MD · Contact
  • Ospedali Riuniti di Livorno
    Livorno, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Federica Lapira, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale San Luca
    Lucca, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Davide Giorgi, MD · Contact
  • Nuovo ospedale Apuano Massa
    Massa, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Giuseppe Arena, MD · Contact
  • Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Policlinico di Modena
    Modena, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Giuseppe Boriani, PhD · Contact
  • Ospedale Sant'Agostino Estense Modena Baggiovara
    Modena, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Mauro Zennaro, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale Civico, azienda Ospedaliera di Palermo
    Palermo, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Giuseppe Sgarito, MD · Contact
  • Policlinico Paolo Giaccone
    Palermo, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Giuseppe Coppola, MD · Contact
  • Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Maggiore
    Parma, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Francesca Maria Notarangelo, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale Guglielmo da Saliceto Piacenza
    Piacenza, 29100, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Luca Rossi, MD · Contact
  • Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria pisana Cisanello
    Pisa, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Giulio Zucchelli · Contact
  • Fondazione Toscana Gabriele Monasterio
    Pisa, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Andrea Rossi, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale Santa Maria delle Croci
    Ravenna, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Alessandro Dal Monte · Contact
  • ASMN Reggio Emilia
    Reggio Emilia, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Fabio Quartieri, MD · Contact
  • Ospedale degli Infermi Rimini
    Rimini, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Davide Saporito, MD · Contact
  • Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Senese
    Siena, Italy
    Recruiting
    • Amato Santoro, MD · Contact
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 22, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06324682
Responsible party
Matteo Bertini (Professor, University Hospital of Ferrara) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 22, 2024
Start date
Jan 1, 2023
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2033 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 31, 2034 (estimated)
Last update
Mar 22, 2024

Study contacts

Matteo Bertini, MD, PhD
Contact
brtmtt2@unife.it
+390532236269
Matteo Bertini, MD, PhD
principal investigator · Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
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