Cargando…
Multipoint Pacing versus conventional ICD in Patients with a Narrow QRS complex (MPP Narrow QRS trial): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial
BACKGROUND: Despite an intensive search for predictors of the response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), the QRS duration remains the simplest and most robust predictor of a positive response. QRS duration of ≥ 130 ms is considered to be a prerequisite for CRT; however, some studies have s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5143452/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27927248 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1698-1 |
_version_ | 1782472943752708096 |
---|---|
author | Gasparini, Maurizio Galimberti, Paola Bragato, Renato Ghio, Stefano Raineri, Claudia Landolina, Maurizio Chieffo, Enrico Lunati, Maurizio Mulargia, Ederina Proclemer, Alessandro Facchin, Domenico Rordorf, Roberto Vicentini, Alessandro Marcantoni, Lina Zanon, Francesco Klersy, Catherine |
author_facet | Gasparini, Maurizio Galimberti, Paola Bragato, Renato Ghio, Stefano Raineri, Claudia Landolina, Maurizio Chieffo, Enrico Lunati, Maurizio Mulargia, Ederina Proclemer, Alessandro Facchin, Domenico Rordorf, Roberto Vicentini, Alessandro Marcantoni, Lina Zanon, Francesco Klersy, Catherine |
author_sort | Gasparini, Maurizio |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Despite an intensive search for predictors of the response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), the QRS duration remains the simplest and most robust predictor of a positive response. QRS duration of ≥ 130 ms is considered to be a prerequisite for CRT; however, some studies have shown that CRT may also be effective in heart failure (HF) patients with a narrow QRS (<130 ms). Since CRT can now be performed by pacing the left ventricle from multiple vectors via a single quadripolar lead, it is possible that multipoint pacing (MPP) might be effective in HF patients with a narrow QRS. This article reports the design of the MPP Narrow QRS trial, a prospective, randomized, multicenter, controlled feasibility study to investigate the efficacy of MPP using two LV pacing vectors in patients with a narrow QRS complex (100–130 ms). METHODS: Fifty patients with a standard ICD indication will be enrolled and randomized (1:1) to either an MPP group or a Standard ICD group. All patients will undergo a low-dose dobutamine stress echo test and only those with contractile reserve will be included in the study and randomized. The primary endpoint will be the percentage of patients in each group that have reverse remodeling at 12 months, defined as a reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) of >15% from the baseline. DISCUSSION: This feasibility study will determine whether MPP improves reverse remodeling, as compared with standard ICD, in HF patients who have a narrow QRS complex (100–130 ms). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02402816. Registered on 25 March 2015. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1698-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5143452 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51434522016-12-15 Multipoint Pacing versus conventional ICD in Patients with a Narrow QRS complex (MPP Narrow QRS trial): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial Gasparini, Maurizio Galimberti, Paola Bragato, Renato Ghio, Stefano Raineri, Claudia Landolina, Maurizio Chieffo, Enrico Lunati, Maurizio Mulargia, Ederina Proclemer, Alessandro Facchin, Domenico Rordorf, Roberto Vicentini, Alessandro Marcantoni, Lina Zanon, Francesco Klersy, Catherine Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Despite an intensive search for predictors of the response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), the QRS duration remains the simplest and most robust predictor of a positive response. QRS duration of ≥ 130 ms is considered to be a prerequisite for CRT; however, some studies have shown that CRT may also be effective in heart failure (HF) patients with a narrow QRS (<130 ms). Since CRT can now be performed by pacing the left ventricle from multiple vectors via a single quadripolar lead, it is possible that multipoint pacing (MPP) might be effective in HF patients with a narrow QRS. This article reports the design of the MPP Narrow QRS trial, a prospective, randomized, multicenter, controlled feasibility study to investigate the efficacy of MPP using two LV pacing vectors in patients with a narrow QRS complex (100–130 ms). METHODS: Fifty patients with a standard ICD indication will be enrolled and randomized (1:1) to either an MPP group or a Standard ICD group. All patients will undergo a low-dose dobutamine stress echo test and only those with contractile reserve will be included in the study and randomized. The primary endpoint will be the percentage of patients in each group that have reverse remodeling at 12 months, defined as a reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) of >15% from the baseline. DISCUSSION: This feasibility study will determine whether MPP improves reverse remodeling, as compared with standard ICD, in HF patients who have a narrow QRS complex (100–130 ms). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02402816. Registered on 25 March 2015. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1698-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-12-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5143452/ /pubmed/27927248 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1698-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol Gasparini, Maurizio Galimberti, Paola Bragato, Renato Ghio, Stefano Raineri, Claudia Landolina, Maurizio Chieffo, Enrico Lunati, Maurizio Mulargia, Ederina Proclemer, Alessandro Facchin, Domenico Rordorf, Roberto Vicentini, Alessandro Marcantoni, Lina Zanon, Francesco Klersy, Catherine Multipoint Pacing versus conventional ICD in Patients with a Narrow QRS complex (MPP Narrow QRS trial): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial |
title | Multipoint Pacing versus conventional ICD in Patients with a Narrow QRS complex (MPP Narrow QRS trial): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial |
title_full | Multipoint Pacing versus conventional ICD in Patients with a Narrow QRS complex (MPP Narrow QRS trial): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Multipoint Pacing versus conventional ICD in Patients with a Narrow QRS complex (MPP Narrow QRS trial): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Multipoint Pacing versus conventional ICD in Patients with a Narrow QRS complex (MPP Narrow QRS trial): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial |
title_short | Multipoint Pacing versus conventional ICD in Patients with a Narrow QRS complex (MPP Narrow QRS trial): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial |
title_sort | multipoint pacing versus conventional icd in patients with a narrow qrs complex (mpp narrow qrs trial): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5143452/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27927248 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1698-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gasparinimaurizio multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT galimbertipaola multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT bragatorenato multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT ghiostefano multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT rainericlaudia multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT landolinamaurizio multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT chieffoenrico multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT lunatimaurizio multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT mulargiaederina multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT proclemeralessandro multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT facchindomenico multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT rordorfroberto multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT vicentinialessandro multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT marcantonilina multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT zanonfrancesco multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT klersycatherine multipointpacingversusconventionalicdinpatientswithanarrowqrscomplexmppnarrowqrstrialstudyprotocolforapilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial |