Bachmann’s Bundle Pacing vs Right Atrial Appendage Pacing for AF
Official title: BACHmann Bundle Versus Right Atrial Appendage Pacing Randomized Controlled Trial: Learning Curve, Safety, Efficacy, Physiological Effect, and Transthoracic Echo Guidance
Run by Allegheny Singer Research Institute (also known as Allegheny Health Network Research Institute) · NCT07874763 · Data updated 2026-11-12
This study tests two common atrial pacing methods to see which one is safer over 12 months for people getting a new pacemaker, ICD, or CRT device.
Quick facts
| Study type | Interventional |
|---|---|
| Ages | 18 Years and up |
| Sex | All |
| Enrollment | 334 (estimated) |
| Sponsor | Allegheny Singer Research Institute (also known as Allegheny Health Network Research Institute) Academic / other |
| Locations | 1 site (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) |
| Status | Recruiting |
| Started | August 19, 2025 |
| Main results expected | August 2027 |
| Study ends | August 2028 |
| Registry record updated | October 16, 2026 |
| Trial ID | NCT07874763 on ClinicalTrials.gov |
Is this trial a fit for you?
✓Likely a good fit
Adults 18+ undergoing de novo CIED implantation with an atrial lead and able to consent (or with a legally authorized representative).
✕Probably not a fit
Patients with prior CIED implants, severe comorbidity predicting poor survival, or conditions excluded by NYHA Class IV or severe valvular disease may not benefit.
A plain-English reading of the study's rules. Only the study team can confirm whether you qualify.
What this trial studies
Participants needing a new cardiac implantable device with an atrial lead are randomly assigned to pace from Bachmann’s bundle or from the right atrial appendage. Both approaches are standard care and performed in the right atrium, with follow-up visits at 3, 6, and 12 months. The study collects medical records, blood samples, and patient surveys to compare safety outcomes such as perforation, infection, lead problems, effusion, lead revision, and mortality. The trial uses Medtronic devices at a single site and monitors outcomes over one year to determine if one pacing strategy offers a safety advantage. This is not testing a new drug or device; it compares two established techniques in a controlled setting.
Why it matters
Potential benefit: If one approach proves safer, patients may experience fewer procedure-related complications and better overall safety with future pacing.
How similar studies have gone: Prior ad-hoc comparisons of atrial pacing locations have shown differing feasibility; this study aims to provide more definitive comparative safety data.
Who can join: the full rules
Show full inclusion / exclusion criteria
Inclusion Criteria: * Patients undergoing a de novo cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) (i.e. pacemaker, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), CRT) implant with an atrial lead * Medtronic CIED system used * Age 18 years or older * Able to read and understand English AND EITHER 1)willing and capable of providing informed consent OR 2) in case of incompetence, be represented by a legally authorized representative (LAR), relative/associate with power of attorney (POA), or other recognized surrogate decision-maker who can read and understand English and is willing and capable of providing consent. * Able and willing to participate in all examinations and follow-up visits and tests associated with this clinical study Exclusion Criteria: * Prior CIED implant * Known pericarditis or pericardial effusion * New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Class IV * Severe valvular disease expected to require surgical intervention within 12 months. * History of abnormal bleeding and/or clotting disorder * Severe lung disease, pulmonary hypertension, or any lung disease requiring home supplemental oxygen. * Organ or hematologic transplant, or currently being evaluated for an organ transplant * Women who are pregnant or breastfeeding. This will be assessed clinically as per pre-procedure clinical workflow, and the research coordinator will capture the data.
Where it's running
-
Allegheny General Hospital
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States Recruiting
Study contacts
- Principal investigator: Joshua Silverstein, MD — Allegheny Health Network
- Study coordinator: Caitlin Phalunas, MS BME
- Email: caitlin.phalunas@ahn.org
- Phone: 412-359-3747
Similar studies
Other studies for the same condition or treatment. Recruiting studies are listed first.
-
Pulsed Field vs Cryoballoon for Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Atrial Fibrillation
This trial tests whether pulsed field ablation can shorten the procedure for first-time PVI in AF patients compared with cryoballoon ablation, while keeping safety and effectiveness similar.
-
Pulsed Field Ablation vs Cryoablation for Atrial Fibrillation Under Deep Sedation
This trial tests whether pulsed field ablation (PFA) done under deep sedation works as well as cryoballoon ablation for treating atrial fibrillation, aiming to avoid general anesthesia.
-
AI-powered ECG to help diagnose and predict outcomes in heart disease
Researchers test an AI-enhanced ECG to help diagnose and predict outcomes for people with cardiovascular diseases.
-
Pace-and-ablate strategy in atrial fibrillation: who benefits and long-term outcomes
This study looks at adults with atrial fibrillation who underwent AV node ablation with permanent pacing to see who develops pacing-induced problems and how they do long-term.
-
AI-based cardiac analysis using 12-lead and 1-lead ECG
A clinician-facing pilot test to see if SmartECG-EF helps evaluate heart function using both 12-lead and single-lead ECGs in adults with heart conditions.
-
Long-term half-dose apixaban versus aspirin after Watchman implantation
This trial tests whether continuing a half-dose blood thinner (apixaban) is better than aspirin after Watchman device implantation in people with atrial fibrillation.
How to take part
- Review the eligibility criteria above with your treating physician.
- Check the official listing on ClinicalTrials.gov for the latest contact details and recruitment status.
- Contact the study coordinator or principal investigator to ask for pre-screening. Pre-screening is free and never obligates you to enroll.