Clinical Research Directory

PACEVALUE: Development of a Risk Score to Predict Pacing-Induced Cardiomyopathy in Patients Undergoing Pacemaker or ICD Implantation and Evaluation of Patient Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Across Different Healthcare Systems

The PACEVALUE study is a large, international observational study aiming to improve the treatment of patients receiving cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) such as pacemakers, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. While these devices are vital for managing heart rhythm disorders and heart failure, chronic right ventricular pacing can sometimes cause a condition called pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM), where the left side of the heart weakens over time, leading to increased hospitalizations and higher mortality. The main goal of the study is to develop and validate a risk prediction model using routine clinical and device data to identify patients at highest risk of PICM before device implantation. By stratifying patients according to this risk score, the study aims to guide personalized pacing strategies, including conduction system pacing (CSP) and CRT options, to improve outcomes and reduce complications. The study will recruit approximately 4,500 patients across multiple centers in Europe and Australia, with planned future inclusion of sites in the UK. Participants will be followed for a minimum of two years, with data collection including heart function imaging, device data, clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes (PROMs/PREMs), and healthcare costs. This observational study will also compare clinical practices and cost-effectiveness of different pacing strategies across diverse healthcare systems, aiming to inform evidence-based, patient-centered, and economically efficient device therapy decisions. The findings will lay the groundwork for future registry-based randomized controlled trials to further optimize pacing treatments.

Physiological Pacing for AV Block to Prevent Pacemaker-induced Cardiomyopathy

The implantation of a pacemaker and conventional cardiac pacing from the right ventricle (apex or septum) is an effective and safe therapy for the treatment of patients with atrioventricular block and bradycardia.

Conduction System Pacing vs. Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

The NORDIC-CSP trial is an investigator-initiated, blinded, nordic RCT aimed at evaluating whether using direct pacing of the HIS bundle (HIS)-pacing or left bundle branch (LBB) pacing is superior to conventional biventricular pacing in reducing the incidence of the composite endpoint of death and non-planned HF hospitalization. The study will be conducted in the 4 CRT-centres in Denmark and 6-8 centres from countries Sweden, Norway and Finland.

Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Right Ventricular Pacing in Atrioventricular Block With Preserved Ejection Fraction

Conventional right ventricular pacing (RVP) has been associated with ventricular dyssynchrony and an increased risk of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy, which may lead to worse clinical outcomes. These adverse effects are more pronounced in patients with pre-existing left ventricular dysfunction. To overcome these limitations, left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), which directly engages the cardiac conduction system to preserve physiological ventricular activation, has been increasingly adopted in clinical practice. However, in patients with atrioventricular block and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF ≥50%), evidence demonstrating the long-term clinical superiority of LBBAP over conventional RVP remains limited. As a result, both pacing strategies continue to be used in current practice. This multicenter randomized trial aims to compare the efficacy, safety, and lead stability of LBBAP using a stylet-driven extendable screw-in lead versus conventional RVP in patients with atrioventricular block and preserved ejection fraction.

Central Haemodynamics and Pacing for AV Block

A randomized, single-blind study comparing two pacing strategies in patients with atrioventricular block requiring permanent pacemaker implantation. This trial evaluates the impact of conduction system pacing (left bundle branch area pacing) versus standard right ventricular pacing on central hemodynamics, cardiac function, and patient quality of life over 12 months. The study will enroll 124 patients from two Estonian tertiary hospitals and measure central systolic arterial pressure as the primary outcome, with secondary assessments of arterial stiffness, echocardiographic parameters, electrical activation patterns, and quality of life scores.

Study of AHRE Burden in Patients Undergoing Bachmann Bundle Area Pacing and Left Bundle Branch Pacing.

This prospective observational study evaluates the burden of Atrial High-Rate Episodes (AHRE) in patients without a prior history of atrial fibrillation who undergo concurrent Bachmann Bundle Area Pacing (BBAP) and Left Bundle Branch Pacing (LBBP). Physiological pacing at these sites aims to improve interatrial conduction and reduce the risk of atrial arrhythmias. The study includes a comparative assessment across three patient groups: 1. BBAP + LBBP (physiological pacing group) 2. Right Atrial Appendage (RAA) pacing + LBBP 3. Conventional pacing - RAA and Right Ventricular (RV) pacing AHRE burden will be quantified via device diagnostics and remote monitoring at 3, 12 and 24 months post-implantation. Episodes will be classified by duration (0-6 min, 6-24 h, \>24 h), differentiating subclinical AHRE from clinically documented AF. Secondary analyses include electrocardiographic changes (P-wave indices), the need for antiarrhythmic therapy, and comprehensive echocardiographic evaluation of atrial function (e.g., LA strain, conduction delays, LAVI). The study aims to determine whether physiological pacing (BBAP + LBBP) provides superior protection against AHRE development compared with RAA + LBBP and conventional pacing strategies.

Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing (LBBAP) PMCF Study

The objective of this study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of LBBA pacing/sensing in patients implanted with the Tendril STS 2088TC or UltiPace LPA1231 lead through 6 months post-implant.

Fluoroless Conduction System Implant

Conduction system pacing is a new way of stimulating the heart using pacemaker wires. Traditional pacemakers stimulate the heart muscle which causes disordered heart beats: the walls of the heart move at different times. This wears down the heart over time. Conduction system pacemakers stimulate the heart's electrical system directly producing natural heart beats that are much less disordered. These pacemakers can be challenging to insert with different heart shapes, sizes and scars. This can increase procedure times and time exposed to xray as pacemakers are inserted using x-rays to guide where the lead is implanted. This study aims to allow conduction system pacemakers to be implanted without the use of normal xray (fluoroscopy). The investigators will create an anatomical shell of the heart using special plastic (mapping) catheters that is inserted within the heart from the groin. The investigators will use a special heart scanning (echo) catheter to see how the pacemaker wire is inserted into the heart muscle. The investigators will use MRI to confirm that the information we collect is accurate. Using this information the investigators will create a protocol to implant a lead that does not require xray, using only the mapping catheter.

Solutions to the Challenges of Conduction System Pacing

Conduction system pacing is a new way of stimulating the heart using pacemaker wires. Traditional pacemakers stimulate the heart muscle which causes disordered heart beats: the walls of the heart move at different times. This wears down the heart over time. Conduction system pacemakers stimulate the heart's electrical system directly producing natural heart beats that are much less disordered. Unfortunately, these pacemakers can only be implanted by a small group of experts at specialised centres with specialist equipment. This study aims to allow conduction system pacemakers to be offered to any patient at any hospital by simplifying the process of inserting the pacemaker wires and the improving the pacemaker's ability to interpret electrical traces. Firstly, the best locations in the heart for conduction system pacemaker wires using specialised electrical traces, MRI and ultrasound scans will be identified. Features that can be seen on X-ray to guide doctors to these locations will then be identified. Secondly, the investigators will collect electrical information from the pacemaker wires and additional electrical traces to develop an algorithm that can make the interpretation the electrical traces more accurate.

CSP Versus BiVP for Heart Failure Patients with RVP Upgraded to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

The present study is a prospective, multicenter, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trail. It aims to investigate whether the efficacy of conduction system pacing (CSP) is non-inferior to biventricular pacing (BiVP) in patients with heart failure and right ventricular pacing (RVP) requiring upgrading to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing in Patients With Heart Failure

The relevance of Left Bundle Branch Pacing (LBBP) lies in its potential as a promising treatment option for patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block. LBBP aims to restore the normal physiological activation of the heart by delivering electrical impulses to the anatomical area of the left bundle branch, which may lead to more effective and synchronized ventricular contractions. Compared to traditional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), this can result in a more physiological correction of dyssynchrony, improvement in left ventricular pump function, reduction in left ventricular volumes, and a decrease in mitral regurgitation. A crucial criterion is the reduction of heart failure symptoms and the enhancement of the patients quality of life.

LVSP vs RVP in Patients With AV Conduction Disorders

Rationale: Permanent cardiac pacing is the only available therapy in patients with atrioventricular (AV) conduction disorders and can be life-saving. Right ventricular pacing (RVP), the routine clinical practice for decades in these patients, is non-physiologic, leads to dyssynchronous electrical and mechanical activation of the ventricles, and may cause pacing-induced cardiomyopathy and heart failure. Left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) is an emerging form of physiologic pacing that can possibly overcome the adverse effects of RVP. Study design and hypotheses: The LEAP trial is a multi-center investigator-initiated, prospective, randomized controlled, open label, blinded endpoint evaluation (PROBE) study that compares LVSP with conventional RVP. A total of four hundred seventy patients with a class I or IIa indication for pacemaker implantation due to AV conduction disorders and an expected ventricular pacing percentage \>20% will be randomized 1:1 to LVSP or RVP. The primary endpoint is a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, hospitalization for heart failure and a more than 10% decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in absolute terms leading to a LVEF below 50% at one year follow-up. LVSP is anticipated to result in improved outcomes. Secondary objectives are to evaluate whether LVSP is cost-effective and associated with an improved quality of life (QOL) as compared to RVP. Quality of life is expected to improve with LVSP and reduced healthcare resource utilizations are expected to ensure lower costs in the LVSP group during follow-up, despite initial higher costs of the implantation. Study design: Multi-center investigator-initiated, prospective, randomized controlled, open label, blinded endpoint evaluation (PROBE) study. Study population: Adult patients with a bradycardia-pacing indication because of AV conduction disorders with an expected ventricular pacing percentage of ≥ 20% and a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) \>/= 40%. Four hundred seventy patients will be randomized 1:1 to LVSP or RVP. Intervention: LVSP vs RVP. Main study parameters/endpoints: The primary endpoint is a composite of all-cause mortality, hospitalization for heart failure, and a more than 10% point decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) leading to an LVEF below 50%, which as a binary combined endpoint will be determined at one year follow-up. Secondary endpoints are: * Time to first occurrence of all cause mortality or hospitalization for heart failure. * Time to first occurrence of all cause mortality. * Time to first occurrence of hospitalization for heart failure. * Time to first occurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) de novo. * The echocardiographic changes in LVEF at one year. * The echocardiographic changes in diastolic (dys-)function at one year. * The occurrence of pacemaker related complications. * Quality of life (QOL), cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) and budget impact analysis (BIA). The secondary endpoints (other than echocardiographic LVEF change) will be determined at the end of the follow-up period, when the last included patient has reached one year follow-up. The individual follow-up time for patients at this time point will vary with a minimum of one year.

Long-term Outcomes of Conduction System Pacing: a National Multicenter Observational Study - NORMAND'HIS / STIMU'HIS

This prospective multicenter registry will evaluate the long-term electrical, echocardiographic, and clinical outcomes of conduction system pacing (CSP). There is currently limited data in the literature regarding the long-term results and benefits of CSP. The long-term maintenance of conduction system (His bundle or Left Bundle Branch) capture and physiological ventricular activation is an essential prerequisite for the expected benefits of this technique. There is currently no prospective study evaluating the preservation of CSP during long-term follow-up. The design of the present study will allow reliable evaluation of CSP maintenance at 2 years follow-up. The prospective collection of electrical data (pacing thresholds, impedance, R wave sensing) during pacemaker follow-up visits will confirm thresholds stability over the long term. The incidence of atrial fibrillation episodes will also be precisely evaluated and will provide new information. Although pathophysiological studies have demonstrated less impairment of left atrial function with conduction system pacing, there is currently no data on the incidence of atrial fibrillation in patients implanted with a CSP pacemaker. Echocardiographic data will be prospectively collected in order to analyse the evolution of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) after CSP. This systematic follow-up is rarely found in CSP studies, often retrospective, with significant missing echocardiographic data. The hypothesis is that patients benefiting from CSP will not develop the deleterious effects demonstrated with conventional right ventricular pacing, such as left ventricular dilation and LVEF impairment. Inter- and intraventricular asynchrony criteria will also be systematically evaluated during follow-up echocardiography.Finally, this prospective cohort will also systematically collect clinical follow-up data (hospitalizations for heart failure and NYHA stage).