Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT01709682
NCT01709682CompletedPhase 2

Progression of Atrial Fibrillation After a Failed Initial Ablation Procedure in Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Comparison of the Drug Therapy Versus Re-Ablation

Meshalkin Research Institute of Pathology of Circulation1 site in 1 country154 target enrollmentStarted: November 2007Last updated:
Conditions
Interventions
Drugs

Trial Snapshot

Phase
Phase 2
Status
Completed
Sponsor
Enrollment
154
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
progression of AF (AF burden progression and persistent AF)

Study Overview

Brief Summary

The hypothesis of this study was that early re-ablation (test) was superior to AAD therapy (control) in patients with previous failed PVI ablation for paroxysmal AF.

Study Design

Study Type
Interventional
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention Model
Parallel
Primary Purpose
Treatment
Masking
Single (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility Criteria

Ages
18 Years to 65 Years (Adult, Older Adult)
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No

Inclusion Criteria

  • history of symptomatic PAF

Exclusion Criteria

  • congestive heart failure
  • LV ejection fraction < 35%
  • left atrial diameter > 60 mm

Arms & Interventions

AAD therapy

Active Comparator

Recurrent episodes were pharmacologically managed by conventional AAD therapy (propafenone, flecainide, and/or sotalol as first-line drugs in patients without structural heart disease or amiodarone as a single drug or in combination in patients with structural heart disease or in case of first-line drug failure) according to AF management guidelines.

Intervention: Anti-Arrhythmia Agents (propafenone, flecainide, and/or sotalol, or amiodarone) (Drug)

AAD therapy

Active Comparator

Recurrent episodes were pharmacologically managed by conventional AAD therapy (propafenone, flecainide, and/or sotalol as first-line drugs in patients without structural heart disease or amiodarone as a single drug or in combination in patients with structural heart disease or in case of first-line drug failure) according to AF management guidelines.

Intervention: ILR implantation (Procedure)

re-ablation procedure

Active Comparator

Reisolation of the PVs was performed by identifying the breakthrough site on the mapping catheter (NaviStar ThermoCool, Biosense-Webster Inc., Diamond Bar, CA). RF energy was delivered at 43°C, 35 W, 0.5 cm away from the PV ostia at the anterior wall, and was reduced to 43°C, 30 W, 1 cm away from the PV ostia at the posterior wall, with a saline irrigation rate of 17 mL/min. Each lesion was ablated continuously until the local potential amplitude decreased by >80% or RF energy deliveries exceeded 40 s.

The endpoint of ablation was complete PVI; this was confirmed when Lasso catheter mapping showed the disappearance of all PV potentials or the dissociation of PV potentials from LA activity. Only in patients with induced left atrial flutter, additional RF ablation lines were created by connecting the left inferior PV to the mitral annulus (mitral isthmus) and the roof of the LA between the two superior PVs.

Intervention: re-ablation procedure (Procedure)

re-ablation procedure

Active Comparator

Reisolation of the PVs was performed by identifying the breakthrough site on the mapping catheter (NaviStar ThermoCool, Biosense-Webster Inc., Diamond Bar, CA). RF energy was delivered at 43°C, 35 W, 0.5 cm away from the PV ostia at the anterior wall, and was reduced to 43°C, 30 W, 1 cm away from the PV ostia at the posterior wall, with a saline irrigation rate of 17 mL/min. Each lesion was ablated continuously until the local potential amplitude decreased by >80% or RF energy deliveries exceeded 40 s.

The endpoint of ablation was complete PVI; this was confirmed when Lasso catheter mapping showed the disappearance of all PV potentials or the dissociation of PV potentials from LA activity. Only in patients with induced left atrial flutter, additional RF ablation lines were created by connecting the left inferior PV to the mitral annulus (mitral isthmus) and the roof of the LA between the two superior PVs.

Intervention: ILR implantation (Procedure)

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

progression of AF (AF burden progression and persistent AF)

Time Frame: 3 year

Secondary Outcomes

  • recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia, including AF and atrial flutter/tachycardia(3 years)
  • number of further ablation(3 years)
  • predictors of AF progression(3 years)
  • complications(3 years)

Investigators

Sponsor
Meshalkin Research Institute of Pathology of Circulation
Sponsor Class
Network
Responsible Party
Sponsor

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials