Precision lead placement could boost heart failure device success
NCT ID NCT03280862
First seen Jun 27, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026
Summary
This study tested whether placing the left ventricle lead of a cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device at the heart's latest electrical activation spot improves outcomes. It included 1,000 heart failure patients with bundle branch block. The goal was to see if this targeted approach reduces death or unplanned heart failure hospitalizations compared to standard lead placement.
What this could mean
Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.
- Active substance
- Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device implantation
- What this could lead to
- If successful, this approach could reduce deaths and hospitalizations for heart failure patients by improving how the device is placed.
- What could go wrong
- The trial is completed but results are not yet widely confirmed. Targeted placement may increase procedure time, infection risk, or radiation exposure, and might not benefit all patients.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Study facts
What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.
- Phase
-
Not a phased trial
Phase numbers describe drug development. The registry uses this when they do not apply, as it does for trials of devices, procedures or behaviour changes, and for observational studies.
- Participants
-
1,000 people
The number who actually took part.
- Started
-
Mar 2018
- Finished
-
Feb 2026
- Lead sponsor
-
Other sponsor
The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.
Who can take part
This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.
- Ages
-
40 years and older
- Sex
-
Anyone
- Healthy volunteers
-
Not accepted
This study is not open to healthy volunteers. The entry requirements below say who it is open to.
Show the full entry requirements Hide the full entry requirements
Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.
Inclusion Criteria: * Heart Failure, NYHA II, III, outpatient IV * LVEF ≤35% measured by echocardiography * Optimal medical treatment for heart failure * Bundle Branch Block * Indication for primary CRT-D or CRT-P implantation or upgrade from RV pacing (pacemaker or ICD) to CRT-D or CRT-P * Ischemic heart disease (IHD) or non-IHD * Sinus rhythm or atrial fibrillation * Life expectancy \>2 years * Signed informed consent Exclusion Criteria: * NYHA class I * Acute mycardial infarction (AMI) within the latest 3 months * Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) within the latest 3 months * Life expectancy \<2 years * Participation in another clinical trial of experimental treatment * Contraindication for establishing implantable device treatment * Previously implanted CRT system * Does not wish to participate
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Branch block, bundle are added.
Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor
Conditions
The condition(s) this trial relates to.
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
Contacts and locations
Locations
-
Aalborg University Hospital
Aalborg, 9000, Denmark
-
Aarhus University Hospital
Aarhus, 8200, Denmark
-
Gentofte University Hospital
Gentofte Municipality, 2900, Denmark
-
Odense University Hospital
Odense, 5000, Denmark
-
Rigshospitalet
Copenhagen, 2100, Denmark
More trials for these conditions
Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.
- Can an inhaler boost heart pumping in COPD patients?
- Can zapping the heart beat drugs for AF in heart failure?
- Which SGLT2 inhibitor wins? trial pits empagliflozin against dapagliflozin
- Can daily mindful breathing ease heart failure symptoms?
- Can a smartphone app keep heart failure patients out of the hospital?
- Can better training get doctors to talk about what matters most to dying veterans?