Comparison of Treatment Outcomes Between Convergent Procedure and Catheter Ablation for Persistent and Longstanding Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
NCT04509180 · Status: WITHDRAWN · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL
Last updated 2023-01-18
Summary
In the last 20 years, atrial fibrillation has become one of the leading healthcare burden in Europe and other developed countries. With an ever-increasing prevalence and incidence, atrial fibrillation is expected to remain a significant problem in the near future. Due to numerous detrimental effects atrial fibrillation has on the patient's health, having an efficient and safe treatment is crucial for managing the problem.
The gold standard for an atrial fibrillation treatment is a catheter ablation. In typical catheter ablation procedure, triggers in pulmonary veins are addressed with a pulmonary vein isolation- offering a high long-term success rate in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. However, the same cannot be said for persistent and longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation. Studies have shown that efficiency of catheter ablation for persistent and longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation, including multiple procedures per patient, ranges around 50 %. It is postulated that extrapulmonary vein triggers, such as foci located in the posterior wall of the left atrium, play an important role in initiating and maintaining persistent and longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation. In the past, to address this issue, a convergent procedure was developed. In convergent procedure an epicardial ablation of posterior wall is performed through a subxyphoid window. Next, an endocardial ablation with an ablation catheter is performed to isolate pulmonary veins. Because the epicardial lesions are applied in the opposite direction and not towards the esophagus, ablation of posterior wall can safely be performed. The procedure offers a high long-term success rate (85%) in patients with persistent and longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation. However, due to higher associated invasiveness, the convergent procedure carries a higher risk of complications compared with catheter ablation (4 % vs 9 %).
With advancements in ablation catheter technology, such as continuous force measurement at the tip of the catheter, the depth and volume of the lesion can be estimated. This information greatly increases the reliability of lesion formation. The operator can thus effectively apply lesions to the posterior wall of the left atrium more safely in regards to the collateral damage to the esophagus.
The objectives of the study are:
* To compare procedural, safety and efficiency profile of convergent procedure with catheter ablation procedure, both targeting pulmonary veins triggers and triggers located in the posterior wall of the left atrium.
* To compare long-term success rate of convergent procedure with catheter ablation procedure, both targeting pulmonary veins triggers and triggers located in the posterior wall of the left atrium.
Conditions
- Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
- Longstanding Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
Interventions
- PROCEDURE
-
Catheter ablation
Endovascular approach
- PROCEDURE
-
Convergent procedure
Surgical and endovascular approach
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
University Medical Centre Ljubljana
lead OTHER
Study Design
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Masking
- NONE
- Model
- PARALLEL
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 18 Years
- Max Age
- 70 Years
- Sex
- ALL
- Healthy Volunteers
- No
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2021-02-26
- Primary Completion
- 2022-09-01
- Completion
- 2024-09-01
Countries
- Slovenia
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
Evaluation of the Cardioblate CryoFlex Surgical Ablation System in Longstanding Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
NCT01558635 ·Status: TERMINATED ·Phase: NA
-
Atrioventricular Junction Ablation and Biventricular Pacing for Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure
NCT02137187 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Impact Of Different Ablation Approaches on Outcome In Coexistent Atrial Fibrillation and Flutter
NCT01439386 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Treatment of AF in Heart Failure
NCT01411371 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Ablation vs Amiodarone for Treatment of AFib in Patients With CHF and an ICD
NCT00729911 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Atrial Fibrillation Management in Congestive Heart Failure With Ablation
NCT00652522 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Catheter Versus Thoracoscopic Surgical Ablation Strategy in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
NCT01385358 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Triple Atria Extrastimuli vs Pulmonary Vein Isolation Alone in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
NCT05870306 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Study of Ablation Versus antiaRrhythmic Drugs in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
NCT00863213 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Use of Radiofrequency Ablation to Eliminate Continuous Atrial Fibrillation in Patients Undergoing Mitral Valve Surgery
NCT00238706 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Atrial Fibrillation Ablation The Hybrid Approach Versus Traditional Management
NCT01298986 ·Status: WITHDRAWN ·Phase: EARLY_PHASE1
-
Catheter Ablation vs. Standard Conventional Treatment in Patients With LV Dysfunction and AF
NCT00643188 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Clinical and Economic Consequences of Left Atrial Bipolar Radiofrequency Ablation of Persistent and Permanent Atrial Fibrillation During Cardiac Surgery
NCT00157807 ·Status: TERMINATED ·Phase: NA
-
Cardiac Surgical Treatment by Radiofrequency Ablation on Valvular Patients: Efficacy at 3 Months
NCT00259623 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Outcomes of Early Referral to Radiofrequency Ablation in Symptomatic Atrial Fibrillation Patients.
NCT05559073 ·Status: UNKNOWN
-
Efficacy of Different Ablation Strategies for Controlling Atrial Fibrillation
NCT00379301 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Combined Endoscopic Epicardial and Percutaneous Endocardial Ablation Versus Repeated Catheter Ablation in Persistent and Longstanding Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
NCT02695277 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Compared to Rate Control Strategy in Patients With Impaired Left Ventricular Function
NCT02509754 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Atrial Fibrillation After Catheter Versus Thoracoscopic Ablation Using Patient Activated Implantable Loop Recorders: The ACTUAL Study
NCT01503268 ·Status: WITHDRAWN ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Ablation or Surgery for Atrial Fibrillation (AF) Treatment
NCT00662701 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Thoracoscopic Ablation Versus Catheter Ablation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation
NCT04237389 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Norwegian Study of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Treatment: Cryoballoon Versus Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation
NCT03008811 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure
NCT01082601 ·Status: WITHDRAWN
-
Comparison Between One-stage Hybrid Ablation and Thoracoscopic Surgical Ablation for Intractable Atrial Fibrillation
NCT03127423 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Versus Atrioventricular Nodal Ablation with Conduction System Pacing in Heart Failure
NCT06207383 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA