[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"pacing-induced-cardiomyopathy\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:pacing-induced-cardiomyopathy":26},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,4,0,[8,46,73,106],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":13,"acronym":14,"eligibilityCriteria":15,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":18,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":22,"briefSummary":24,"conditions":25,"keywords":28,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":34,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":35,"startDateStruct":38,"completionDateStruct":40,"leadSponsor":42,"locationsCount":45},"100520123","physiological-versus-right-ventricular-outcome-trial-evaluated-for-bradycardia-treatment-upgrades-100520123",false,"NCT06052475","Physiological Versus Right Ventricular Outcome Trial Evaluated for Bradycardia Treatment Upgrades","PROTECT-UP","Patients with an RV pacemaker and LVEF 35-50% and a high burden of right ventricular pacing (\\>40%) who are clinically indicated for a cardiac resynchronisation therapy upgrade procedure and:\n\n1. EF reduced by \\>5% of increase in LVESV by 10ml since implant\n2. NT-proBNP \\>250ng\u002FL in sinus rhythm\n3. NT-proBNP \\> 750 Ng\u002FL if AF\n4. Left atrial volume index \\> 30ml\u002Fm2\n5. Regular loop diuretics prescribed\n6. Decline in daily patient activity by \\>1 hour per day since implant\n7. Decrease in device measured thoracic impedance\n8. Patient reported decline in functional class or exercise tolerance\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Those unable to provide informed consent\n* Patients under age 18\n* Pregnant women","ALL","18 Years",{"count":19,"type":20},155,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[23],"NA","Guidelines for patients having first-time implants advocate that even when heart function is only mildly impaired, modern pacing approaches should be utilised to avoid the potentially damaging effects of RV pacing to preventing symptoms from pacing induced or worsened cardiomyopathy.\n\nHowever, once a traditional (RV) pacemaker is implanted, development of impaired heart function does not prompt a device upgrade. Even at the end of battery life, physicians simply replace it like-for-like.\n\nThis trial tests whether such patients have better symptoms and quality of life if changed to a modern physiological pacing strategy from the traditional RV pacing approach.\n\nIn this crossover trial, participants will be upgraded to a physiological pacing strategy.\n\nAfter their procedure, they will have a one-month run-in period to recover from the procedure (their pacemaker will be programmed to continued RV pacing).\n\nThey will be have 2 one-month blinded time periods, randomised to physiological pacing or right ventricular pacing alternately. They will subsequently undergo two six-month blinded randomised time periods.\n\nPatients will document symptoms monthly on a mobile phone application or computer. At the end of each time period, they will have measurements of heart function, a walking test and quality-of-life questionnaires including the SF-36 questionnaire.\n\nThe investigators hypothesise that upgrading to physiological pacing strategies will improve patients' quality of life.",[26,27],"Pacing-Induced Cardiomyopathy","Heart Failure",[29,30,31,32],"Physiological Pacing","RV Pacing","Biventricular Pacing","Pacemaker Upgrade","RECRUITING","2026-06-22",{"date":36,"type":37},"2026-06-23","ACTUAL",{"date":39,"type":37},"2023-09-04",{"date":41,"type":20},"2027-09-04",{"name":43,"class":44},"Imperial College London","OTHER",12,{"id":47,"slug":48,"hasResults":11,"nctId":49,"briefTitle":50,"officialTitle":51,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":52,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":53,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":55,"briefSummary":56,"conditions":57,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":63,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":64,"startDateStruct":66,"completionDateStruct":68,"leadSponsor":70,"locationsCount":72},"100489249","left-vs-left-randomized-clinical-trial-100489249","NCT05650658","Left vs Left Randomized Clinical Trial","Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Using His\u002FLeft Bundle Branch Pacing vs Biventricular Pacing With a Left Ventricular Epicardial Lead in Patients With Heart Failure (HF) With Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)≤50% and With Either a Wide QRS Complex (>130 ms) or With\u002FAnticipated >40% Pacing Randomized Clinical Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Men and women 18 years of age or older.\n* A LVEF ≤ 50% within 6 months prior to enrollment.\n* Resting QRS duration ≥130 ms as evidenced by a historical 12-lead ECG prior to enrollment OR anticipated right ventricular pacing \\>40% OR device in place with right ventricular pacing \\> 40%.\n* Are optimized on HF guideline directed medical therapy according to current HF published guidelines OR patient's physician will make an effort to start all guideline-directed medical therapy and titrate doses up as permitted by the participant clinical status and co-morbidities prior to implantation procedure.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Women who are pregnant, lactating, or plan to become pregnant during the course of the trial.\n* Participants with angiographic evidence of coronary disease who are candidates for coronary revascularization and are likely to undergo coronary artery bypass graft surgery or percutaneous coronary, intervention in the next three (3) months.\n* Enzyme-positive myocardial infarction within the past three (3) months prior to enrollment.\n* Coronary artery bypass graft surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention (balloon and\u002For stent angioplasty) within the past three (3) months prior to enrollment.\n* Reversible non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (e.g., acute viral myocarditis).\n* Participants with Chagas disease, cardiac sarcoidosis or amyloidosis.\n* Expected to receive left ventricular assist device or heart transplantation within 6 months.\n* Participants with primary severe valvular disease (e.g., aortic stenosis).\n* Have a life expectancy of less than 12 months.\n* Participants with irreversible brain damage from preexisting cerebral disease.\n* Participants with a contrast dye allergy unable or unwilling to undergo pretreatment with steroids and\u002For diphenhydramine.\n* Participants participating in any other interventional cardiovascular clinical trial.\n* Participants who would be unable to comply with the study's follow-up visit schedule; or\n* Participants who had any prior unsuccessful attempt at implantation of biventricular pacing (BiVP), His Bundle Pacing (HBP), or Left Bundle Branch Pacing (LBBP) device.",{"count":54,"type":20},2136,[23],"The investigators aim to prospectively test the comparative effectiveness of His or Left bundle branch pacing in relation to patient centered outcomes (quality of life, physical activity, heart failure hospitalization, mortality) and comparative safety in relation to device-related complications and re-interventions (e.g., lead dislodgement, infection) relative to standard of care biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVEF≤50%) and with either a wide QRS (≥130 ms) or with\u002Fanticipated \\>40% pacing who are already receiving current standard heart failure pharmacological therapy.",[27,58,59,60,61,62,26],"Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction","AV Block","LBBB","RBBB","Intraventricular Conduction Delay","2025-09-28",{"date":65,"type":37},"2025-10-02",{"date":67,"type":37},"2023-09-13",{"date":69,"type":20},"2029-06-30",{"name":71,"class":44},"Baylor College of Medicine",71,{"id":74,"slug":75,"hasResults":11,"nctId":76,"briefTitle":77,"officialTitle":78,"acronym":79,"eligibilityCriteria":80,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":81,"targetDuration":83,"studyType":84,"phases":4,"briefSummary":85,"conditions":86,"keywords":92,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":96,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":97,"startDateStruct":99,"completionDateStruct":101,"leadSponsor":103,"locationsCount":105},"100394507","pacing-to-maintain-physiologic-ventricular-activation-100394507","NCT04416958","Pacing to Maintain Physiologic Ventricular Activation","Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronisation Using the Intrinsic Conduction System to Maintain Physiologic Ventricular Activation","Pace-Conduct","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Pacemaker or ICD Implantation aiming to avoid pacing induced ventricular dyssynchrony according to current guidelines\n* age \\>= 18 years\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* no informed consent for the procedure given\n* no follow-up data",{"count":82,"type":20},200,"1 Year","OBSERVATIONAL","Right ventricular pacing causes ventricular dyssynchrony and may be associated with impaired outcome. In the last decade, several approaches for more physiological pacing became available and were implemented in the latest guidelines. However, compared to conventional device implantation, cardiac resynchronization, His bundle pacing and left bundle area pacing remain demanding procedures in the individual case. Goal of the single center observational \"Pace conduct\" study is to evaluate implantation success, safety and outcome of pacing methods that maintain physiologic ventricular activation.",[87,88,89,26,90,91],"Pacemaker DDD","His Bundle Pacing","LBB Area Pacing","Left Bundle-Branch Block","ICD",[93,94,95],"His bundle pacing","LBB area pacing","cardiac resynchronisation therapy","2024-10-11",{"date":98,"type":37},"2024-10-15",{"date":100,"type":37},"2018-01-01",{"date":102,"type":20},"2030-12-31",{"name":104,"class":44},"Klinikum-Fuerth",1,{"id":107,"slug":108,"hasResults":11,"nctId":109,"briefTitle":110,"officialTitle":111,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":112,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":113,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":115,"briefSummary":116,"conditions":117,"keywords":119,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":126,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":127,"startDateStruct":129,"completionDateStruct":131,"leadSponsor":133,"locationsCount":135},"100563787","left-bundle-branch-area-pacing-or-biventricular-pacing-in-af-and-left-ventricular-dysfunction-100563787","NCT06620705","Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing or Biventricular Pacing in AF and Left Ventricular Dysfunction","Pacing Away from Heart Failure: Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing or Biventricular Pacing in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Left Ventricular Dysfunction","INCLUSION CRITERIA\n\nIn order to be eligible to participate in this study, a subject must meet all of the following criteria:\n\n* Adults ≥18 years with permanent AF and LVEF \\< 50% who either require ventricular pacing because of bradycardia including patients undergoing AV junction ablation, or have an indication for cardiac resynchronization therapy.\n* Expected percentage of ventricular pacing \\> 40%\n* ≥ 3 months of heart failure medication optimization\n\nOf note, patients who already have a device, but require an upgrade to a CRT device, can also be included\n\nEXCLUSION CRITERIA\n\nA potential subject who meets any of the following criteria will be excluded from participation in this study:\n\n* Age \\< 18 years\n* Pregnancy or active pregnancy wish\n* Not eligible for implantation of an RV lead, LBBAP lead, or LV lead in the coronary sinus\n* Recent valve intervention\u002Fsurgery or acute myocardial infarction (\\< 6 months)\n* NYHA functional class IV heart failure, left ventricular assist device or cardiac transplant",{"count":114,"type":20},34,[23],"It is unknown whether left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) or biventricular pacing best prevents or reverses left ventricular (LV) adverse remodelling in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who require ventricular pacing or CRT. This randomized non-inferiority cross-over trial will compare left ventricular end-systolic volume change and secondary endpoints between LBBAP and biventricular pacing in patients with AF and LV dysfunction.",[27,118,26],"Block, Heart",[120,121,122,123,124,125],"pacing","cardiac resynchronization therapy","left bundle branch area pacing","conduction system pacing","heart failure","heart block","2024-09-26",{"date":128,"type":37},"2024-10-01",{"date":130,"type":37},"2024-09-10",{"date":132,"type":20},"2028-10",{"name":134,"class":44},"srdpiers",2]