Key result
The BLOCK HF trial is designed to enroll up to 1,636 patients to determine whether biventricular pacing is superior to right ventricular pacing in patients with AV block and LV dysfunction.
Why the study?
Does biventricular pacing reduce the composite of all-cause mortality, heart failure-related urgent care, or LVESVI increase in patients with AV block, LV dysfunction, and mild to moderate HF compared to right ventricular pacing alone?
RCT (n=1,636)
Double-blind
Randomized
Yes
Does biventricular pacing reduce the composite of all-cause mortality, heart failure-related urgent care, or LVESVI increase in patients with AV block, LV dysfunction, and mild to moderate HF compared to right ventricular pacing alone?
The BLOCK HF trial is designed to determine if biventricular pacing is superior to right ventricular pacing in slowing heart failure progression in patients with AV block and LV dysfunction.
Tests BiV vs RV pacing superiority in AV block with LV dysfunction; RCT will provide definitive evidence to guide practice.
BACKGROUND: Right ventricular (RV) pacing restores ventricular systole in patients with atrioventricular (AV) block, yet recent studies have suggested that in patients with AV block and left ventricular (LV) dysfunction, RV pacing may exacerbate the progression to heart failure (HF). BLOCK HF is a prospective, multi-center, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial designed to determine whether patients with AV block, LV dysfunction (EF < or = 50%), and mild to moderate HF (NYHA I-III) who require pacing benefit from biventricular (BiV) pacing, compared with RV pacing alone. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this trial is to determine whether the time to first event (all-cause mortality, heart failure-related urgent care, or a > or = 15% increase in left ventricular end systolic volume index [LVESVI]) for patients with BiV pacing is superior to that of patients with RV pacing. METHODS: Patients with AV block and LV dysfunction who require permanent pacing and undergo successful implantation of a commercial Medtronic CRT device, with or without an ICD, will be randomized to BiV or RV pacing. Patients are followed at least every 6 months until study closure. Up to 1,636 patients may be enrolled in 150 centers worldwide. CONCLUSION: BLOCK HF is a large, randomized, clinical study in pacing-indicated patients with AV block, mild to moderate HF symptoms, and LV dysfunction to determine whether BiV pacing is superior to RV pacing in slowing the progression of HF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Curtis et al. (2007) conducted an RCT in Atrioventricular block and left ventricular dysfunction (n=1,636). Biventricular (BiV) pacing vs. Right ventricular (RV) pacing was evaluated on Time to first event (all-cause mortality, heart failure-related urgent care, or a >= 15% increase in left ventricular end systolic volume index [LVESVI]). The BLOCK HF trial is designed to enroll up to 1,636 patients to determine whether biventricular pacing is superior to right ventricular pacing in patients with AV block and LV dysfunction.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: