免责声明: 本站汇总 FDA、ClinicalTrials.gov、PubMed、SEC EDGAR 等官方公开数据,仅供一般参考,不构成医疗建议、诊断、治疗建议或投资建议。

临床试验

Randomized Comparison of Endocardial Versus Epicardial - From the Coronary Sinus - Left Ventricular Pacing for Resynchronization in Heart Failure.

NCT:NCT01260402 · COMPLETED

NCT编号NCT01260402
状态COMPLETED
开始日期2011-03-03
完成时间2015-07-30
SponsorUniversity Hospital, Bordeaux (OTHER)
First posted
Last updated

简要摘要

Biventricular pacing is a validated treatment for patients suffering from heart failure resistant to medical treatment. However, up to 30% of the patients are non responsive to this strategy using the coronary sinus approach to pace the Left Ventricle (LV). It has been demonstrated that the magnitude of the improvement was highly dependant on the LV pacing site. The coronary sinus approach rarely offers more than 1 or 2 potential pacing sites. Resynchronisation using a transeptal approach to pace the left ventricle on the cardiology has been shown feasible on small series. We therefore would like to compare these two approached in a randomised prospective study to confirm the hypotheses that endocardial LV pacing by offering multiple choices for the pacing sites reduces the number of non responders and is associated with greater hemodynamic benefit when compared to the conventional coronary sinus approach.

官方来源

在 ClinicalTrials.gov 上查看 →

数据来自 ClinicalTrials.gov API。有关最新状态,请参阅官方记录。

↑