search
Back to results

LVAD Versus GDMT in Ambulatory Advanced Heart Failure Patients (AMBU-VAD)

Primary Purpose

End-stage Heart Failure

Status
Recruiting
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
France
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
HeartMate 3 TM Left Ventricular Assist System
Guideline Directed Medical Therapy
Sponsored by
Hospices Civils de Lyon
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for End-stage Heart Failure focused on measuring Heart Failure, End-stage, Not inotrope-dependent, Left Ventricular Assist Device, HeartMate 3 system, Heart Surgery, Guideline Directed Medical Therapy

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. All patients ≥18 years,
  2. End-stage heart failure, evaluated by the local Heart Team, defined as:

    • Left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 35% within 1 week prior to randomization and
    • Cardiac Index < 2.2 L/min/m² by hemodynamic use within 1 month prior to randomization or VO2 max < 14 ml/kg/min (or <50% of predicted VO2max) within 1 month prior to randomization OR low 6-min walking test (< 420 m) within 1 month prior to randomization or ≥ 2 hospitalizations for heart failure in the past year and
    • NYHA III-IV (INTERMACS profile 4-6) and and
    • Receiving medical management with optimal doses of betablockers, Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme-inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (if eligible) and Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists and Sodium-GLucose co-Transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors for at least 45 days if tolerated according to guideline at maximal tolerated dose (if maximal HF drug dosage is not reached the investigators will have to explain reason behind not maximal dosage).
    • Receiving Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy and or Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators if indicated for at least 45 days and
    • No mechanical circulatory support or inotrope therapy since > 30 days,
  3. Having a health coverage,
  4. Signed written informed consent,
  5. Patient without any legal protection measure.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Inotrope dependent patients or existence of ongoing mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in the last 30 days,
  2. Right ventricular dysfunction (heart team consensus) with the expected need of Bi-VAD support,
  3. Female patients currently pregnant or women of childbearing age who were not using contraception,
  4. Active infection,
  5. Irreversible end-organ dysfunction prior to LVAD implantation,
  6. Contraindication to anti-coagulant or anti-platelet therapies,
  7. History of any organ transplant prior to inclusion,
  8. Psychiatric disease/disorder, irreversible cognitive dysfunction or psychosocial issues likely to impair compliance,
  9. Frailty according to heart team,
  10. Platelet count < 100,000 x 103/liter (<100,000/ml)
  11. Body Surface Area (BSA) < 1.2 m2,
  12. Any condition other than heart failure that could limit survival to less than 24 months,
  13. Chronic renal insufficiency (GFR definitely <30 ml/min) or hepatic cirrhosis,
  14. Participation in any other interventional clinical investigation.

Sites / Locations

  • Hôpital Pneumologique et Cardiovasculaire Louis PradelRecruiting
  • La Tronche Hospital / CHU GrenobleRecruiting
  • Arnaud de Villeneuve Hospital / CHU MontpellierRecruiting
  • CHU RouenRecruiting
  • CHRU, Institut Lorrain du Coeur et des Vaisseaux Louis Mathieu

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

Other

Arm Label

Early Left Ventricular Assist Device and Guideline Directed Medical Therapy

Guideline Directed Medical Therapy

Arm Description

The intervention group will receive an early left ventricular assist device implantation (bridge to transplantation, bridge to candidacy or destination therapy) in addition to guideline directed medical therapy within 21 days of randomization.

Patients randomized in the control group will continue their guideline directed medical therapy which comprises the following stable combination at the maximal tolerated dose of betablockers, Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme-inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers or Angiotensin receptor Neprilysin inhibitor and Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists and Sodium-GLucose co-Transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors if tolerated.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

All-cause mortality rate
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Number of urgent ECMO implantation
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Number of urgent heart transplantation
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Number of LVAD implantation
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Number of unplanned hospitalization for heart failure
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Number of adverse events (AEs)
Number of adverse events (AEs)
Number of adverse events (AEs)
Number of adverse events (AEs)
Number of adverse events (AEs)
Number of adverse events (AEs)
All-cause mortality rate
All-cause mortality rate
All-cause mortality rate
All-cause mortality rate
All-cause mortality rate
All-cause mortality rate
number of ECMO implantation
number of ECMO implantation
number of ECMO implantation
number of ECMO implantation
number of ECMO implantation
number of ECMO implantation
number of urgent heart transplantation
number of urgent heart transplantation
number of urgent heart transplantation
number of urgent heart transplantation
number of urgent heart transplantation
VAD implantation rate
VAD implantation rate
VAD implantation rate
VAD implantation rate
VAD implantation rate
VAD implantation rate
Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure rate
Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure rate
Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure rate
Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure rate
Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure rate
Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure rate
Recurrent hospitalizations rate
Defined as total number of hospitalizations
Recurrent hospitalizations rate
Defined as total number of hospitalizations
Recurrent hospitalizations rate
Defined as total number of hospitalizations
Recurrent hospitalizations rate
Defined as total number of hospitalizations
Recurrent hospitalizations rate
Defined as total number of hospitalizations
Recurrent hospitalizations rate
Defined as total number of hospitalizations
Number of patients with a persistence of the eligibility to LVAD implantation
In the GDMT group only
Number of patients with a persistence of the eligibility to LVAD implantation
In the GDMT group only
Number of days alive out of hospital
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Quality of life assessed by European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire score
Quality of life assessed by European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire score
Quality of life assessed by European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire score
Quality of life assessed by European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire score
Quality of life assessed by European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire score
Quality of life assessed by European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire score
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Right ventricular function assessed by echocardiographic parameters
Right ventricular function assessed by echocardiographic parameters
Right ventricular function assessed by echocardiographic parameters
Right ventricular function assessed by echocardiographic parameters
Right ventricular function assessed by echocardiographic parameters
Right ventricular function assessed by echocardiographic parameters
Heart failure assessed by N Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) rate
Heart failure assessed by N Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) rate
Heart failure assessed by N Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) rate
Heart failure assessed by N Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) rate
Heart failure assessed by N Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) rate
Heart failure assessed by N Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) rate
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Soluble urokinase-type Plasminogen Activator Receptor (SuPAR)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Soluble urokinase-type Plasminogen Activator Receptor (SuPAR)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Soluble urokinase-type Plasminogen Activator Receptor (SuPAR)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Soluble urokinase-type Plasminogen Activator Receptor (SuPAR)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Soluble urokinase-type Plasminogen Activator Receptor (SuPAR)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM1)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM1)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM1)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM1)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM1)
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM1)

Full Information

First Posted
February 17, 2021
Last Updated
August 3, 2023
Sponsor
Hospices Civils de Lyon
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04768322
Brief Title
LVAD Versus GDMT in Ambulatory Advanced Heart Failure Patients
Acronym
AMBU-VAD
Official Title
Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) Versus Guideline Recommended Medical Therapy in Ambulatory Advanced Heart Failure Patients (GDMT)
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
August 2023
Overall Recruitment Status
Recruiting
Study Start Date
February 24, 2021 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
February 2026 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
February 2027 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
Hospices Civils de Lyon

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Heart failure is a severe disease affecting approximately 1-2% of the adult population in developed countries and around 26 million people worldwide. Up to 10% of these patients are in advanced stage heart failure, which is defined by a significant morbimortality and considerable medical expenses. Despite advances in its medical management, advanced (or end stage) heart failure is characterized by refractoriness to conventional therapies including guideline-directed pharmacological and non-surgical device treatments. These patients remain severely symptomatic (NYHA IV) and have objective signs of congestion or low cardiac output. Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have been used in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction for almost 20 years either as an alternative or a bridge to heart transplantation. LVADs improve heart failure symptoms and survival at the cost of increased rates of infection, stroke and bleeding. Despite the lack of evidence, LVAD implantation in ambulatory patients is not rare, with INTERMACS profiles ≥4 patients representing 15.7% of the overall population implanted between 2012 and 2016. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy and safety of left ventricular assist devices compared to traditional HF medical treatment alone in a population of ambulatory advanced heart failure patients. Secondary objectives are to better identify subgroups of patients that would benefit the most from the implantation of an LVAD as well as to assess the optimal timing of intervention.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
End-stage Heart Failure
Keywords
Heart Failure, End-stage, Not inotrope-dependent, Left Ventricular Assist Device, HeartMate 3 system, Heart Surgery, Guideline Directed Medical Therapy

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
92 (Anticipated)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Early Left Ventricular Assist Device and Guideline Directed Medical Therapy
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
The intervention group will receive an early left ventricular assist device implantation (bridge to transplantation, bridge to candidacy or destination therapy) in addition to guideline directed medical therapy within 21 days of randomization.
Arm Title
Guideline Directed Medical Therapy
Arm Type
Other
Arm Description
Patients randomized in the control group will continue their guideline directed medical therapy which comprises the following stable combination at the maximal tolerated dose of betablockers, Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme-inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers or Angiotensin receptor Neprilysin inhibitor and Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists and Sodium-GLucose co-Transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors if tolerated.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
HeartMate 3 TM Left Ventricular Assist System
Intervention Description
The HeartMate 3 TM Left Ventricular Assist System will be implanted within 21 days of randomization.
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
Guideline Directed Medical Therapy
Intervention Description
Patients randomized in the control group will continue their guideline directed medical therapy which comprises the following stable combination at the maximal tolerated dose of betablockers, Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme-inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers or Angiotensin receptor Neprilysin inhibitor and Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists and Sodium-GLucose co-Transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors if tolerated.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
All-cause mortality rate
Description
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Time Frame
Through 24 months when the last subject completes 12 months of follow-up
Title
Number of urgent ECMO implantation
Description
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Time Frame
Through 24 months when the last subject completes 12 months of follow-up
Title
Number of urgent heart transplantation
Description
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Time Frame
Through 24 months when the last subject completes 12 months of follow-up
Title
Number of LVAD implantation
Description
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Time Frame
Through 24 months when the last subject completes 12 months of follow-up
Title
Number of unplanned hospitalization for heart failure
Description
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Time Frame
Through 24 months when the last subject completes 12 months of follow-up
Title
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Description
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Time Frame
Through 24 months when the last subject completes 12 months of follow-up
Title
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Description
The composite of 5 clinical endpoints is using a win ratio concept. Mortality has higher priority than Urgent ECMO implantation, urgent heart transplantation or LVAD implantation, unplanned hospitalization for heart failure, improvement of KCCQ by at least 5points, improvement of 6-minute walk test distance by at least 75 meters. Our main approach uses matched pairs of patients. Each pair is 'untied' first on the basis of the most important event (death) and secondly (if necessary) on the lesser event. The numbers of pairs in which the patient on new treatment 'won' and 'lost' are compared to produce the 'win ratio'. The 95% CI and P-value for the win ratio are readily obtained.
Time Frame
Through 24 months when the last subject completes 12 months of follow-up
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Number of adverse events (AEs)
Time Frame
at 1 month
Title
Number of adverse events (AEs)
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
Number of adverse events (AEs)
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
Number of adverse events (AEs)
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
Number of adverse events (AEs)
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
Number of adverse events (AEs)
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
All-cause mortality rate
Time Frame
at 1 month
Title
All-cause mortality rate
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
All-cause mortality rate
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
All-cause mortality rate
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
All-cause mortality rate
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
All-cause mortality rate
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
number of ECMO implantation
Time Frame
at 1 month
Title
number of ECMO implantation
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
number of ECMO implantation
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
number of ECMO implantation
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
number of ECMO implantation
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
number of ECMO implantation
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
number of urgent heart transplantation
Time Frame
at 1 month
Title
number of urgent heart transplantation
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
number of urgent heart transplantation
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
number of urgent heart transplantation
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
number of urgent heart transplantation
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
VAD implantation rate
Time Frame
at 1 month
Title
VAD implantation rate
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
VAD implantation rate
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
VAD implantation rate
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
VAD implantation rate
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
VAD implantation rate
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure rate
Time Frame
at 1 month
Title
Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure rate
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure rate
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure rate
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure rate
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure rate
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
Recurrent hospitalizations rate
Description
Defined as total number of hospitalizations
Time Frame
at 1 month
Title
Recurrent hospitalizations rate
Description
Defined as total number of hospitalizations
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
Recurrent hospitalizations rate
Description
Defined as total number of hospitalizations
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
Recurrent hospitalizations rate
Description
Defined as total number of hospitalizations
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
Recurrent hospitalizations rate
Description
Defined as total number of hospitalizations
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
Recurrent hospitalizations rate
Description
Defined as total number of hospitalizations
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
Number of patients with a persistence of the eligibility to LVAD implantation
Description
In the GDMT group only
Time Frame
at 12 and 24 months
Title
Number of patients with a persistence of the eligibility to LVAD implantation
Description
In the GDMT group only
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
Number of days alive out of hospital
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
Time Frame
at inclusion
Title
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
Time Frame
at 1 month
Title
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
New York Heart Association (NYHA) status
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Time Frame
at inclusion
Title
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
Distance in meters at 6-min walking test
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
Quality of life assessed by European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire score
Time Frame
at inclusion
Title
Quality of life assessed by European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire score
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
Quality of life assessed by European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire score
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
Quality of life assessed by European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire score
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
Quality of life assessed by European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire score
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
Quality of life assessed by European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire score
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Time Frame
at inclusion
Title
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
Quality of life assessed by KCCQ score
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
Right ventricular function assessed by echocardiographic parameters
Time Frame
at inclusion
Title
Right ventricular function assessed by echocardiographic parameters
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
Right ventricular function assessed by echocardiographic parameters
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
Right ventricular function assessed by echocardiographic parameters
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
Right ventricular function assessed by echocardiographic parameters
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
Right ventricular function assessed by echocardiographic parameters
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
Heart failure assessed by N Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) rate
Time Frame
at inclusion
Title
Heart failure assessed by N Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) rate
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
Heart failure assessed by N Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) rate
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
Heart failure assessed by N Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) rate
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
Heart failure assessed by N Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) rate
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
Heart failure assessed by N Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) rate
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Soluble urokinase-type Plasminogen Activator Receptor (SuPAR)
Time Frame
at inclusion
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Soluble urokinase-type Plasminogen Activator Receptor (SuPAR)
Time Frame
at 1 month
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Soluble urokinase-type Plasminogen Activator Receptor (SuPAR)
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Soluble urokinase-type Plasminogen Activator Receptor (SuPAR)
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Soluble urokinase-type Plasminogen Activator Receptor (SuPAR)
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
Time Frame
at inclusion
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
Time Frame
at 1 month
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
Time Frame
at 6 months
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
Time Frame
at 24 months
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM1)
Time Frame
at inclusion
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM1)
Time Frame
at 1 month
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM1)
Time Frame
at 3 months
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM1)
Time Frame
at 12 months
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM1)
Time Frame
at 18 months
Title
Cardio-renal syndrome assessed by rates of Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM1)
Time Frame
at 24 months

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: All patients ≥18 years, End-stage heart failure, evaluated by the local Heart Team, defined as: Left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 35% within 1 week prior to randomization and Cardiac Index < 2.2 L/min/m² by hemodynamic use within 1 month prior to randomization or VO2 max < 14 ml/kg/min (or <50% of predicted VO2max) within 1 month prior to randomization OR low 6-min walking test (< 420 m) within 1 month prior to randomization or ≥ 2 hospitalizations for heart failure in the past year and NYHA III-IV (INTERMACS profile 4-6) and and Receiving medical management with optimal doses of betablockers, Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme-inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (if eligible) and Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists and Sodium-GLucose co-Transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors for at least 45 days if tolerated according to guideline at maximal tolerated dose (if maximal HF drug dosage is not reached the investigators will have to explain reason behind not maximal dosage). Receiving Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy and or Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators if indicated for at least 45 days and No mechanical circulatory support or inotrope therapy since > 30 days, Having a health coverage, Signed written informed consent, Patient without any legal protection measure. Exclusion Criteria: Inotrope dependent patients or existence of ongoing mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in the last 30 days, Right ventricular dysfunction (heart team consensus) with the expected need of Bi-VAD support, Female patients currently pregnant or women of childbearing age who were not using contraception, Active infection, Irreversible end-organ dysfunction prior to LVAD implantation, Contraindication to anti-coagulant or anti-platelet therapies, History of any organ transplant prior to inclusion, Psychiatric disease/disorder, irreversible cognitive dysfunction or psychosocial issues likely to impair compliance, Frailty according to heart team, Platelet count < 100,000 x 103/liter (<100,000/ml) Body Surface Area (BSA) < 1.2 m2, Any condition other than heart failure that could limit survival to less than 24 months, Chronic renal insufficiency (GFR definitely <30 ml/min) or hepatic cirrhosis, Participation in any other interventional clinical investigation.
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Guillaume BAUDRY, Dr
Phone
383157331
Ext
+33
Email
g.baudry@chru-nancy.fr
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Géraldine SAMSON
Email
geraldine.samson@chu-lyon.fr
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Guillaume BAUDRY, Dr
Organizational Affiliation
CHRU Nancy
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Hôpital Pneumologique et Cardiovasculaire Louis Pradel
City
Bron
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
MATTEO POZZI, Dr
Phone
4 72 35 71 49
Ext
+33
Email
matteo.pozzi@chu-lyon.fr
Facility Name
La Tronche Hospital / CHU Grenoble
City
La Tronche
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
AUDE BOIGNARD
Email
aboignard@chu-grenoble.fr
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
AUDE BOIGNARD, Dr
Facility Name
Arnaud de Villeneuve Hospital / CHU Montpellier
City
Montpellier
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
PASCAL BAPTISTELLA
Email
p-battistella@chu-montpellier.fr
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
PASCAL BAPTISTELLA, Dr
Facility Name
CHU Rouen
City
Rouen
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
FABRICE BAUER
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
FABRICE BAUER
Facility Name
CHRU, Institut Lorrain du Coeur et des Vaisseaux Louis Mathieu
City
Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Not yet recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
GUILLAUME BAUDRY
Phone
3 83 15 73 31
Ext
33
Email
g.baudry@chru-nancy.fr
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
GUILLAUME BAUDRY, Dr

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No

Learn more about this trial

LVAD Versus GDMT in Ambulatory Advanced Heart Failure Patients

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs