Completed

Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM)

0 criteria met from your profileSee at a glance how your profile meets each eligibility criteria.
What is being tested

electrophysiology

+ electrocardiography, ambulatory
+ imipramine
Procedure
Drug
Who is being recruted

Arrhythmia
+4

+ Cardiovascular Diseases
+ Death, Sudden, Cardiac
From 18 to 75 Years
How is the trial designed

Treatment Study

Phase 3
Interventional
Study Start: July 1985

Summary

Principal SponsorUniversity of Utah
Last updated: January 21, 2016
Sourced from a government-validated database.Claim as a partner
Study start date: July 1, 1985Actual date on which the first participant was enrolled.

To determine whether electrophysiologic study (EPS) or Holter monitoring (HM) was the better method for selecting effective long-term antiarrhythmic drug therapy in patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, or an episode of aborted sudden death. BACKGROUND: There had been no prospective, randomized studies that compared the accuracy of EPS versus HM in guiding long-term drug therapy for ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation. Success had been reported using both techniques. Using a rigorous ECG monitoring protocol in patients, a less than five percent per year incidence of sudden death had been reported. Several investigators reported that the results of electropharmacologic testing were predictive of clinical response. One of the largest studies, by Mason and Winkle, reported that, in 51 patients with recurrent ventricular tachycardia who were treated with drugs predicted to be effective based on the results of electropharmacologic testing, ventricular tachycardia did not recur in 68 percent at 18 months of follow-up. In contrast, ventricular tachycardia did not recur in only 11 percent of patients treated with drugs predicted to be ineffective. Two prior studies had compared, in a non-randomized fashion, the predictive accuracy of EPS and HM in treating patients with ventricular tachycardia/ ventricular fibrillation. A retrospective analysis of 44 patients with ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation who underwent both HM and EPS was performed in which the elimination of ventricular tachycardia on the HM and the suppression of ventricular tachycardia induced during programmed stimulation was the therapeutic goal. The positive and negative predictive value of EPS was found to be 88 percent and 94 percent, respectively. The corresponding values for ECG monitoring were found to be 70 percent and 50 percent, respectively. It was concluded that EPS provided a higher degree of accuracy than HM in predicting the long-term clinical response to drug therapy, over a mean follow-up of 18 months. However, in this study the criterion for judging efficacy by HM was a liberal one and involved only the elimination of ventricular tachycardia. A second study examined the results of HM in 19 patients with ventricular tachycardia who were treated based on EPS. Among eight patients, in whom inducible ventricular tachycardia was suppressed during electrophysiologic testing, six had no change or worsening of premature ventricular contractions on the HM. These patients had a benign follow-up despite the continued presence of frequent or complex ventricular ectopy. It was concluded that EPS was superior to HM in predicting successful drug therapy. Existing data suggested that both electrophysiologic testing and Holter monitoring might be effective techniques for determining effective drug therapy for ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation. However, there was not enough data available to assess which technique was more effective. A prospective, randomized comparison of the two techniques would be a very significant contribution which could potentially have a major impact on the medical community. DESIGN NARRATIVE: Randomized, fixed sample, multicenter trial conducted at 14 institutions. Patients meeting clinical criteria underwent Holter monitoring. Those having an average of 30 premature ventricular contractions per hour underwent EPS. Those having inducible ventricular tachycardia were randomized into an EPS arm or to a Holter exercise treadmill arm of drug testing. Each patient received, in random sequences, up to six antiarrhythmic drugs. When an effective drug was found, patients underwent a predischarge HM and exercise test. Follow-up continued for one year after the last subject had been randomized. The primary endpoint in the trial was time to arrhythmia recurrence during therapy with a drug predicted to be effective by either EPS or HM.

Official TitleElectrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM) 
Principal SponsorUniversity of Utah
Last updated: January 21, 2016
Sourced from a government-validated database.Claim as a partner

Protocol

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.
Design Details
Treatment Study
These studies test new ways to treat a disease, condition, or health issue. The goal is to see if a new drug, therapy, or approach works better or has fewer side effects than existing options.

How participants are assigned to different groups/arms
In this clinical study, participants are placed into groups randomly, like flipping a coin. This ensures that the study is fair and unbiased, making the results more reliable. By assigning participants by chance, researchers can better compare treatments without external influences.

Other Ways to Assign Participants
Non-randomized allocation
: Participants are assigned based on specific factors, such as their medical condition or a doctor's decision.

None (Single-arm trial)
: If the study has only one group, all participants receive the same treatment, and no allocation is needed.

Eligibility

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria: person's general health condition or prior treatments.
Conditions
Criteria
Any sexBiological sex of participants that are eligible to enroll.
From 18 to 75 YearsRange of ages for which participants are eligible to join.
Healthy volunteers not allowedIf individuals who are healthy and do not have the condition being studied can participate.
Conditions
Pathology
Arrhythmia
Cardiovascular Diseases
Death, Sudden, Cardiac
Heart Diseases
Tachycardia, Ventricular
Ventricular Arrhythmia
Ventricular Fibrillation
Criteria

Men and women with documented ventricular tachycardia and those resuscitated from sudden death.



Study Centers

These are the hospitals, clinics, or research facilities where the trial is being conducted. You can find the location closest to you and its status.
This study has no location dataSave this study to your profile to know when the location data is available. 

CompletedNo study centers