NCT07456423

Brief Summary

In this Emergency Department (ED)-based study, the investigators evaluated a standardized modified Valsalva maneuver (MVM) as first-line therapy and compared intravenous (IV) adenosine with IV diltiazem among patients with persistent atrioventricular nodal re-entrant tachycardia (AVNRT)-consistent supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) after MVM, focusing on successful conversion to sinus rhythm. The investigators also assessed drug-related adverse events and clinically relevant treatment-course measures.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
140

participants targeted

Target at P50-P75 for phase_4

Timeline
Completed

Started Jul 2024

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Start

First participant enrolled

July 1, 2024

Completed
12 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

June 30, 2025

Completed
2 months until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

August 30, 2025

Completed
6 months until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

February 25, 2026

Completed
9 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

March 6, 2026

Completed
Last Updated

March 6, 2026

Status Verified

March 1, 2026

Enrollment Period

12 months

First QC Date

February 25, 2026

Last Update Submit

March 4, 2026

Conditions

Keywords

supraventricular tachycardiaAVNRTmodified Valsalva maneuveradenosinediltiazem

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Conversion to sinus rhythm on continuous cardiac monitor/ECG without rescue therapy

    The outcome was cardiac rhythm (sinus rhythm vs persistent SVT) assessed using continuous ECG monitoring. Conversion was defined as sinus rhythm documented on the monitor and confirmed by a rhythm strip and/or 12-lead ECG, adjudicated by a blinded outcome assessor. "Successful conversion" required conversion with the randomized, initially assigned drug regimen (IV adenosine vs IV diltiazem) without crossover to the alternative drug, synchronized cardioversion, or other rescue therapy within the outcome time window.

    Within 20 minutes after initiation of the assigned study drug

Secondary Outcomes (3)

  • Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and post-treatment ECG events assessed by continuous cardiac monitoring/ECG

    Within 2 hours following the initial study drug administration

  • Time to conversion to sinus rhythm (minutes) assessed by continuous ECG monitoring

    Up to 60 minutes following the initial study drug administration (conversion time/status documented at 10, 15, 30, and 60 minutes)

  • Need for rescue therapy (crossover to the alternative study drug) or synchronized electrical cardioversion

    During the acute ED observation period, up to 60 minutes after initiation of the initially assigned study drug (or earlier if synchronized cardioversion is required).

Study Arms (2)

Adenosine group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

The adenosine group received a rapid IV push of adenosine.

Drug: Adenosine intravenous

Diltiazem group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

The diltiazem group received an IV bolus of diltiazem.

Drug: Diltiazem intravenous

Interventions

Adenosine was administered as a rapid IV push (6 mg over \~2 seconds) followed immediately by a 10-mL normal saline flush; the injected arm was briefly elevated to facilitate rapid central delivery. If tachycardia persisted and no rhythm conversion occurred within 1-2 minutes, additional doses of 12 mg and then 18 mg were administered using the same technique, per the study protocol.

Adenosine group

Diltiazem was administered intravenously as 0.25 mg/kg (maximum 20 mg) over approximately 2 minutes. If tachycardia persisted, a second dose of 0.35 mg/kg (maximum 25 mg) was administered after \~15 minutes.

Diltiazem group

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Age ≥ 18 years
  • Presentation to the emergency department with hemodynamically stable, regular narrow-complex SVT consistent with AVNRT
  • a regular narrow-complex tachycardia with QRS duration \<120 ms
  • no discernible P waves on the presenting rhythm strip or 12-lead ECG
  • a ventricular rate of 160-220 beats/min

You may not qualify if:

  • Contraindications to adenosine or diltiazem (known hypersensitivity to adenosine or diltiazem, prior heart transplantation, or concomitant dipyridamole/carbamazepine therapy)
  • Clinical evidence of impaired cerebral perfusion (e.g., altered mental status)
  • Pegnancy
  • Hemodynamic instability or respiratory failure requiring emergency intubation and advanced life support

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Haseki Training and Research Hospital

Istanbul, Fatih, 34265, Turkey (Türkiye)

Location

Related Publications (6)

  • Lee CA, Morrissey B, Chao K, Healy J, Ku K, Khan M, Kinteh E, Shedd A, Garrett J, Chou EH. Adenosine Versus Fixed-Dose Intravenous Bolus Diltiazem on Reversing Supraventricular Tachycardia in The Emergency Department: A Multi-Center Cohort Study. J Emerg Med. 2025 Aug;75:55-64. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2025.05.020. Epub 2025 Jun 6.

  • Alabed S, Sabouni A, Providencia R, Atallah E, Qintar M, Chico TJ. Adenosine versus intravenous calcium channel antagonists for supraventricular tachycardia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Oct 12;10(10):CD005154. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005154.pub4.

  • Lim SH, Anantharaman V, Teo WS, Chan YH. Slow infusion of calcium channel blockers compared with intravenous adenosine in the emergency treatment of supraventricular tachycardia. Resuscitation. 2009 May;80(5):523-8. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.01.017. Epub 2009 Mar 3.

  • Appelboam A, Reuben A, Mann C, Gagg J, Ewings P, Barton A, Lobban T, Dayer M, Vickery J, Benger J; REVERT trial collaborators. Postural modification to the standard Valsalva manoeuvre for emergency treatment of supraventricular tachycardias (REVERT): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015 Oct 31;386(10005):1747-53. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61485-4. Epub 2015 Aug 24.

  • Brubaker S, Long B, Koyfman A. Alternative Treatment Options for Atrioventricular-Nodal-Reentry Tachycardia: An Emergency Medicine Review. J Emerg Med. 2018 Feb;54(2):198-206. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2017.10.003. Epub 2017 Nov 26.

  • Link MS. Clinical practice. Evaluation and initial treatment of supraventricular tachycardia. N Engl J Med. 2012 Oct 11;367(15):1438-48. doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp1111259. No abstract available.

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Tachycardia, SupraventricularTachycardia, Atrioventricular Nodal Reentry

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

TachycardiaArrhythmias, CardiacHeart DiseasesCardiovascular DiseasesCardiac Conduction System DiseasePathologic ProcessesPathological Conditions, Signs and SymptomsTachycardia, Reciprocating

Study Officials

  • Adem Az

    Haseki Training and Research Hospital

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
phase 4
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
SINGLE
Who Masked
INVESTIGATOR
Masking Details
Patients were randomly assigned to the adenosine or diltiazem groups using a web-based computer-generated randomization service (https://www.randomizer.org/). Allocation concealment was ensured using sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes (SNOSE). Envelopes were prepared and sealed according to the randomization list and opened sequentially after eligibility had been confirmed and written informed consent obtained.Clinicians administering the interventions were not blinded to treatment allocation but were not involved in outcome assessment or data analysis. Outcome assessors and the statistical team were blinded to treatment assignment. Treatment codes were accessible only in emergency safety situations requiring unblinding, and such cases were documented according to the study protocol. All primary analyses were conducted according to the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle, with per-protocol analyses reported as sensitivity analyses.
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
CROSSOVER
Model Details: Single center
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Principal Investigator

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

February 25, 2026

First Posted

March 6, 2026

Study Start

July 1, 2024

Primary Completion

June 30, 2025

Study Completion

August 30, 2025

Last Updated

March 6, 2026

Record last verified: 2026-03

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

Stored in non-publicly available Available on request

Locations