Premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) coexist in patients with heart failure (HF) and LV dysfunction. Frequent PVCs have shown to induce a reversible cardiomyopathy (PVC-CM). This clinical pilot study will enroll 36 patients with frequent PVCs (burden \>10%) and CM (LVEF \<45%) and randomize them to either: 1) RFA or 2) AADs. Prior to treatment, patients will undergo a baseline cardiac MR if clinically indicated followed by 3-month observation period (optimal HF medical therapy). Changes in LV function/scar, PVC burden/arrhythmias and clinical/functional status (QOL, HF symptoms and admissions, NYHA class) and adverse events will be assessed throughout the observation period and compare with PVC suppression strategies (RFA or AAD). Similar comparison will be made between RFA and AAD treatment groups during a 12-month follow up using a Prospective Randomized Open, Blinded End-point (PROBE) study design. The treatment regimens will be compared in an intention-to-treat analysis. In addition, a total of 20,000 consecutive ambulatory ECG Holter monitors from all participating centers will be screened to identify all patients with probable diagnosis of PVC-CM. This pilot study is intended to estimate the prevalence of this clinical entity and pave the way for a large full scale randomized trial to identify best treatment strategy for patients with PVC-CM. Treating and reversing this underestimated PVC-CM may improve patient's health and subsequently decrease HF healthcare spending.
Rationale. Frequent PVCs have shown to induce a reversible cardiomyopathy (PVC-CM). Yet, it is unclear why some patients develop PVC-CM, while others do not. Appropriate diagnosis and treatment of patients with PVC-CM is believed to carry significant benefits, improving quality of life (QOL), HF symptoms / admissions and life expectancy. Currently, these patients are offered radiofrequency ablation (RFA), antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) or no treatment depending on physician's experience and resources. Nevertheless, no randomized-prospective study exists to support the benefit of RFA. Thus, a large-scale multicenter randomized clinical trial entitled "Prospective Assessment of PVC Suppression in Cardiomyopathy (PAPS)"' study has been planned to compare these treatment strategies. However, a PAPS pilot study is proposed to better estimate the potential affected patient population, limitations of enrollment, rate of clinical outcomes, potential crossover and drop out. This pilot study is key to better design and power the large-scale multicenter PAPS trial. Objective. PAPS pilot study is a randomized clinical trial to assess the feasibility of enrolling, randomizing treatment strategies and retaining participants with frequent PVCs and associated CM. Hypotheses. Our main hypotheses of the PAPS pilot study are: 1. A large-scale randomized PAPS clinical study is feasible with minimal barriers of enrollment, treatment crossover and drop out due to a unique design including a short observation period and PVC suppression strategy in all participants. 2. The rate of responders (defined as improvement of LVEF ≥ 10% points) with HF medical therapy alone during observation period will be less than 15%. In contrast, RFA and AADs will have a responder rate of at least 35% in the same population. Furthermore, RFA will have a greater 1-year response rate when compared to AAD therapy. 3. RFA will have a lower rate of composite adverse events (worsening NYHA class, HF admission, treatment side effects \& complications, and death), arrhythmia burden and a better long-term tolerance than AADs. Methods. A prospective clinical pilot study is planned to prove the feasibility of a large-scale multicenter clinical trial (PAPS study) of patients with probable PVC-CM. This pilot study will enroll 36 patients with frequent PVCs (burden ≥10%) and CM (LVEF ≤45%) and randomize them to either: 1) RFA or 2) AADs. Prior to treatment, all patients will undergo a baseline cardiac MR if clinically indicated and be allowed a 3-month observation period (optimal HF medical therapy). To assess the effects of PVC suppression, changes in LV function, rate of responders (defined above), PVC burden/arrhythmias and clinical/functional status (QOL, HF symptoms and admissions, NYHA class) and adverse events will be compared between observation period and both PVC suppression strategies (RFA or AAD). To identify the best PVC suppression strategy, similar comparisons between RFA and AAD treatment groups will be performed at 12-month follow up using a Prospective Randomized Open, Blinded End-point (PROBE) study design. The treatment regimens will be compared in an intention-to-treat analysis. In summary, the multicenter PAPS pilot study is intended to better estimate the prevalence of PVC-CM, prove feasibility and rates of clinical outcomes. This pilot study with a multidisciplinary approach will pave the way for a large-scale randomized PAPS trial to identify the best treatment strategy for patients with PVC-CM. Treating and reversing PVC-CM with its associated HF morbidity and mortality will impact not only healthcare spending, but most importantly it will improve patient's health, quality of life and long-term prognosis.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
5
RFA to achieve PVC suppression will be performed using standard techniques and protocols similar to those patients that do not participate in this clinical study.
AAD therapy of choice is amiodarone. Amiodarone loading dose of 10 grams is recommended, followed by maintenance dose of 200-400mg daily to achieve successful PVC suppression. Alternatively, sotalol and/or propafenone could be considered at discretion of electrophysiologists (sotalol dose of at least 120mg twice daily, propafenone 150-300mg tid) if there is a significant concern of safety profile of amiodarone.
University of California Los Angeles Medical Center
Los Angeles, California, United States
University of California, San Francisco
San Francisco, California, United States
James A. Haley Veterans' Hospital
Tampa, Florida, United States
Rush University Medical Center
Chicago, Illinois, United States
Roxbury VA Medical Center
West Roxbury, Massachusetts, United States
Northwell Health System-Staten Island University Hospital
Staten Island, New York, United States
University of Pennsylvania Medical Center
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia, United States
McGuire VA Medical Center
Richmond, Virginia, United States
Virginia Commonwealth University
Richmond, Virginia, United States
...and 1 more locations
Improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction after PVC suppression
Compare the overall improvement or change in LVEF between RFA and AAD groups.
Time frame: 12 months
Responders to PVC suppression strategy
Assessment of the number of responders (delta LVEF ≥ 10%) after PVC suppression strategies will assess the effectiveness of RFA and AADs to reverse or improve cardiomyopathy induced by frequent PVCs.
Time frame: 12 months
Successful PVC suppression
Efficacy of Radiofrequency ablation vs. Antiarrhythmic drugs to achieve successful PVC suppression (defined as a reduction of PVC burden greater than ≥80%).
Time frame: 12 months
Composite Adverse Events
Composite end-point of adverse events, including worsening in NYHA functional class (I-IV), number of HF and cardiac-related admissions, RFA complications and AAD adverse effects and cardiovascular death.
Time frame: 12 months
Composite Arrhythmia Burden
Composite end-point of arrhythmia burden, including PVC recurrence, non-sustained (\< 30sec) and sustained (\> 30sec) ventricular arrhythmias and arrhythmic sudden cardiac death
Time frame: 12 months
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.