Post-Market Randomized Trial: Endoscopically- Guided Ablation vs. Radiofrequency Ablation
- Conditions
- Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation
- Interventions
- Device: RF PVI AblationDevice: Endoscopically guided PVI Ablation
- Registration Number
- NCT01057394
- Lead Sponsor
- CardioFocus
- Brief Summary
To compare the safety and chronic Pulmonary Vein isolation of 2 ablation types.
1. visually guided ablation (VGA) using the EAS-AC and
2. radiofrequency ablation
- Detailed Description
The goal of the study was to compare two interventions, visually-guided endoscopic ablation to standard-of-care radiofrequency (RF) ablation. The study was terminated early by the Sponsor for business reasons before any participants were randomized or treated with RF ablation.
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- TERMINATED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 21
Not provided
Not provided
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description Radiofrequency Ablation RF PVI Ablation PVI using RF ablation Visually Guided Ablation Endoscopically guided PVI Ablation PVI using visually guided ablation with an endoscopic ablation system
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Rate of Permanent Pulmonary Vein Isolation of EAS-AC Compared to EAM Guided Radiofrequency Ablation 3 Months Number of initially isolated pulmonary veins that remain isolated at a 3 month remapping. The unit of measure is treated pulmonary veins (PVs).
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method
Trial Locations
- Locations (2)
Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM)
🇨🇿Prague, Czech Republic
Catholic University of the Sacred Heart
🇮🇹Rome, Italy