About this trial
Congenital heart disease (CHD) affects approximately 1% of newborns in the US, with 25% of those affected having critical conditions requiring open heart surgery within one year of birth. Surgical and medical advances have allowed many patients to live beyond their fourth and fifth decades of life. Unfortunately, cardiac arrhythmias are a relatively common sequela due to cardiac anomalies and surgical scars in addition to residual volume and pressure load on the heart. Atrial arrhythmias, including sinus node dysfunction and intra-atrial re-entrant tachycardia (IART) are among the more common abnormalities found in adults with repaired CHD. The presence of IART significantly increases morbidity and mortality, and anti-arrhythmic medications have been shown to be a sub-optimal treatment strategy with the majority of patients requiring multi-drug therapy. Catheter ablation procedures remain a treatment option, but are less successful for some patient demographics. In the mid-1990's, pacemakers with atrial anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP) capabilities were developed, primarily for the management of atrial flutter and fibrillation in adults with structurally normal hearts. Given the need for pacemakers in the CHD population to manage sinus node dysfunction and atrioventricular node conduction block, the adoption of atrial anti-tachycardia pacemakers began to gain favor. However, there is limited data available comparing the safety and effectiveness of ATP therapy between various demographics of CHD patients. In the current study, the investigators aim to determine if ATP is an effective treatment strategy for IART, specifically within particular sub-populations of CHD patients. Additionally, investigators hope to delineate any significant differences in efficacy of ATP treatment between adult and pediatric congenital heart patients. The research team will accomplish our goals with a retrospective, multi-center study in which data is collected from existing electronic medical records and pacemaker interrogations. Following data collection, the investigators will employ statistical analyses to determine if certain CHD demographics are statistically significant predictors of ATP therapy outcomes.
The purpose of this prospective/retrospective study is to determine how effective atrial anti-tachycardia therapies are with the congenital heart patients who are known to have atrial arrhythmias. As this population ages, we know that arrhythmic burden increases and medications are increased or changed for symptomatic improvement.
Patients will be enrolled at the time of anti tachycardia device (ATD) placement or when device therapies are turned on. Patients will need a minimum of 5 years of clinical history prior to implantation and after implantation (unless patient is very young). Data will be collected both retrospectively and prospectively. The research team will consent patients at the time of clinical evaluations and scheduled follow-ups (usually 3 - 6 months). If therapy is effective, investigators will determine the specific programming which was successful. If therapy was ineffective, investigators will also determine if a change in programing was made and if this improved ATP efficacy. Investigators will also determine the arrhythmia burden. Cardioversion and medications before and after ATD implantation will be the key determinants of arrhythmia burden in this study.
Eligibility criteria
This trial does not accept healthy volunteersQualifiers
must have structural CHD, an atrial arrhythmia and an ATD implanted. ATP must be turned on.
Disqualifiers
Other arrhythmias substrates such as Long QT (LQT), hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (HCM), Catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT), Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy.(ARVC), Brugada & patients who undergo transplant, surgical maze, or ablation within 5 years of ATD implantation.
Trial population
Children and adults with structural congenital heart disease, with documented atrial arrhythmia (IART, CHB, SND), and with an ATD which has therapies enabled. Patients will all be seen by providers at the University of Iowa Children's Hospital.
Trial design
Cohort
Other
Treatments tested in this trial
Medtronic
DevicePacing is done by the implanted device after seeing how the electrical system is functioning giving energy when needed to maintain a stable state or rhythm
Treatment groups
Trial outcomes
Primary outcomes
To measure any change in IART burden before and after ATD implantation.
The comparison will be how many times a cardioversion was needed and or how many times the device was able to or wasn't able to pace the heart out of the fast rate which could otherwise have been treated with a cardioversion. Data will be collected for a maximum of 5 years prior to implantation of an ATD and compared to a maximum of 5 years post implantation.
Secondary outcomes
Antiarrhythmic medication burden
IART is often treated with medication. The dose (mg/kg) for each medication needed to control arrhythmias before and after placement of and ATD will be reviewed.
Comparison of ATP protocols of RAMP vs. BURST +
Once the ATD device is implanted there are two types of treatments the ATD is capable of implementing. The investigators will determine the % success rate for both of these treatment modalities for purposes of comparison.
Sponsors and contacts
Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.
Ian Law
Lead sponsor
University of Iowa
Sponsor institution
Memorial Healthcare System
Collaborator
Indiana University Health
Collaborator
Mayo Clinic
Collaborator
Rainbow Babies and Children's Hospital
Collaborator
The Hospital for Sick Children
Collaborator
University of Wisconsin, Madison
Collaborator
University of California, Los Angeles
Collaborator
University of Utah
Collaborator
Norton Healthcare
Collaborator
University of Michigan
Collaborator
Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Collaborator
Children's Hospital of Orange County
Collaborator