Multicenter Randomized Controlled Crossover Trial Comparing Hemodynamic Optimization Against Echocardiographic Optimization of AV and VV Delay of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy:The BRAVO Trial

Whinnett, Zachary I., Afzal Sohaib, S.M., Mason, Mark, Duncan, Edward, Tanner, Mark, Lefroy, David, Al-Obaidi, Mohamed, Ellery, Sue, Leyva-Leon, Francisco, Betts, Tim, Dayer, Mark, Foley, Paul, Swinburn, Jon, Thomas, Martin, Khiani, Raj, Wong, Tom, Yousef, Zaheer, Rogers, Dominic, Kalra, Paul R., Dhileepan, Vignesh, March, Katherine, Howard, James, Kyriacou, Andreas, Mayet, Jamil, Kanagaratnam, Prapa, Frenneaux, Michael, Hughes, Alun D. and Francis, Darrel P. (2019) Multicenter Randomized Controlled Crossover Trial Comparing Hemodynamic Optimization Against Echocardiographic Optimization of AV and VV Delay of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy:The BRAVO Trial. JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging, 12 (8). pp. 1407-1416. ISSN 1936-878X

[img]
Preview
PDF (Published manuscript) - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (933kB) | Preview

Abstract

Objectives: BRAVO (British Randomized Controlled Trial of AV and VV Optimization) is a multicenter, randomized, crossover, noninferiority trial comparing echocardiographic optimization of atrioventricular (AV) and interventricular delay with a noninvasive blood pressure method. Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy including AV delay optimization confers clinical benefit, but the optimization requires time and expertise to perform. Methods: This study randomized patients to echocardiographic optimization or hemodynamic optimization using multiple-replicate beat-by-beat noninvasive blood pressure at baseline; after 6 months, participants were crossed over to the other optimization arm of the trial. The primary outcome was exercise capacity, quantified as peak exercise oxygen uptake. Secondary outcome measures were echocardiographic left ventricular (LV) remodeling, quality-of-life scores, and N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide. Results: A total of 401 patients were enrolled, the median age was 69 years, 78% of patients were men, and the New York Heart Association functional class was II in 84% and III in 16%. The primary endpoint, peak oxygen uptake, met the criterion for noninferiority (pnoninferiority = 0.0001), with no significant difference between the hemodynamically optimized arm and echocardiographically optimized arm of the trial (mean difference 0.1 ml/kg/min). Secondary endpoints for noninferiority were also met for symptoms (mean difference in Minnesota score 1; pnoninferiority = 0.002) and hormonal changes (mean change in N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide -10 pg/ml; pnoninferiority = 0.002). There was no significant difference in LV size (mean change in LV systolic dimension 1 mm; pnoninferiority < 0.001; LV diastolic dimension 0 mm; pnoninferiority <0.001). In 30% of patients the AV delay identified as optimal was more than 20 ms from the nominal setting of 120 ms. Conclusions: Optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy devices by using noninvasive blood pressure is noninferior to echocardiographic optimization. Therefore, noninvasive hemodynamic optimization is an acceptable alternative that has the potential to be automated and thus more easily implemented. (British Randomized Controlled Trial of AV and VV Optimization [BRAVO]; NCT01258829)

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: biventricular pacing,cardiac resynchronization therapy,echocardiographic optimization,heart failure,hemodynamic optimization,optimization
Faculty \ School: Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Norwich Medical School
Related URLs:
Depositing User: Pure Connector
Date Deposited: 11 Jun 2018 12:30
Last Modified: 28 Sep 2020 23:50
URI: https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/67338
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.02.014

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item