Why the study?
The safety and efficacy of direct microcurrent therapy using an implanted generator (C-MIC) remain uncertain in heart failure.
Does the C-MIC device improve LVEF in ambulatory patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy (LVEF 25-35%, NYHA III-IV)?
RCT (n=70)
Open-label
randomized
Does the C-MIC device improve LVEF in ambulatory patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy (LVEF 25-35%, NYHA III-IV)?
In patients with non-ischaemic HFrEF, the C-MIC device significantly improved LVEF, functional capacity, and quality of life at 6 months compared to medical therapy alone.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
C-MIC warrants consideration in non-ischaemic HFrEF; extends device-based options beyond medical therapy alone.
AIMS: In patients with heart failure, alterations in electrical fields generated within the myocardium have been associated with myocardial oedema which can act as a substrate for left ventricular dysfunction. Safety and efficacy of a direct microcurrent therapy using an implanted generator (C-MIC) remain uncertain. METHODS AND RESULTS: Ambulatory patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 25% to 35% and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III-IV were randomized to C-MIC (device) or control group in addition to guideline-directed medical therapy. The primary endpoint was change in LVEF at 6 months. Pre-specified secondary endpoints included 6-min walk distance (6MWD), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score (KCCQ-OSS), and NYHA functional class. Of 70 patients randomized, 65 were included in modified intention-to-treat analysis (C-MIC device: n = 32; control: n = 33). At 6 months, treatment with C-MIC versus control improved LVEF (mean difference: 5.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.1-7.1%, p < 0.001). The proportions of patients with improvement in at least one NYHA class (risk difference: 68.9%; 95% CI 50.6-87.2, p < 0.001), an increase of ≥5 points in KCCQ-OSS (risk difference: 60.0%; 95% CI 42.3-77.6, p < 0.001), and an increase of ≥30% in 6MWD (risk difference: 38.3%; 95% CI 14.4-62.2) were substantially higher in the device versus control group (p < 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with non-ischaemic chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, the C-MIC device compared with control improved LVEF, symptoms, functional capacity and quality of life.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rame et al. (2025) conducted an RCT in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction (n=70). C-MIC device vs. control was evaluated on change in LVEF at 6 months (MD 5.1%, 95% CI 3.1-7.1, p=<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: