Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2005 Oct;10(4 Suppl):34-43.
doi: 10.1111/j.1542-474X.2005.00073.x.

Multicenter automatic defibrillator implantation trial-cardiac resynchronization therapy (MADIT-CRT): design and clinical protocol

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Multicenter automatic defibrillator implantation trial-cardiac resynchronization therapy (MADIT-CRT): design and clinical protocol

Arthur J Moss et al. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2005 Oct.

Abstract

The planned MADIT-CRT trial is designed to determine if CRT-D will reduce the risk of mortality and HF events by approximately 25% in subjects with ischemic (NYHA class I-II) and non-ischemic (NYHA class II) cardiomyopathy, left ventricular dysfunction (EF<or=0.30), and prolonged intraventricular conduction (QRS duration>or=130 ms).

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic presentation of the group‐sequential design and the associated stopping boundaries (dashed lines). The vertical axis is a measure of the observed treatment differences (efficacy). The horizontal axis is a measure of information collection (mortality or heart failure events, whichever comes first). Stopping boundaries are prespecified for benefit of CRT‐D or ICD‐only, or no difference. Examples of possible outcomes are provided by the three arrows: A = early termination for CRT‐D benefit; B = termination for no difference between the two treatments; C = early termination for ICD‐only benefit. Reaching the upper (lower, respectively) boundary will result in an estimated hazard ratio of <0.85 (>1.18, respectively); an estimated hazard ratio between 0.85 and 1.18(1/0.85) is consistent with a “no difference” conclusion. The 20 prespecified analyses are scheduled at approximately equal information times.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flow diagram of enrollment cascade.
Figure 3
Figure 3
MACIT‐CRT organizational chart.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. O'Connell JB. The economic burden of heart failure. Clin Cardiol 2000;23: 6–10. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Moss AJ, Zareba W, Hall WJ, et al Prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in patients with myocardial infarction and reduced ejection fraction. N Engl J Med 2002;346: 877–883. - PubMed
    1. Bardy GH, Lee KL, Mark DB, et al Amiodarone or an implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator for congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med 2005;352: 225–237. - PubMed
    1. Kadish A, Dyer A, Daubert JP, et al Prophylactic defibrillator implantation in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med 2004;350: 2151–2158. - PubMed
    1. Auricchio A, Stellbrink C, Sack S, et al Long‐term clinical effect of hemodynamically optimized cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with heart failure and ventricular conduction delay. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39: 2026–2033. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms