Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT00878384

Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Rate Control for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure

It is still uncertain what the best treatment is for patients who have both atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure. The aim of the study is to help identify the optimal treatment for patients with these two significant medical conditions. This will be performed by comparing two alternative strategies for AF management: catheter ablation (to restore normal rhythm) and medical therapy (to control heart rate, but not aiming ro restore normal rhythm). After random assignment, the effect of each strategy will be assessed by looking for changes in exercise capacity, symptoms, heart pump function, and quality of life during 12 months of follow-up.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year–80 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Trust

London, SW3 6NP, United Kingdom

About this study

Currently available evidence suggests that occurrence of AF in patients with heart failure (HF) leads to a decline in exercise tolerance, worsened quality of life, increased hospitalisation, and in many studies an increase in mortality. These may be explained by the haemodynamic effects of AF i.e. reduction in functional cardiac output due to inappropriate heart rates, irregularity, and loss of atrial contraction, plus the risk of thromboembolism.

Evidence from large clinical studies has shown that patients with heart failure fare better if sinus rhythm can be restored, but on the contrary a 'rhythm control' strategy (as intention to treat) of cardioversion or antiarrhythmic drugs to achieve sinus rhythm has not been shown to be superior to the strategy of rate control. These apparently contradictory findings might be explained by the poor efficacy and side effects associated with current rhythm control strategies, or could reflect that AF is merely a passive marker of underlying disease severity. However, many studies would point to the former, and it might be hypothesised that the theoretical benefits of sinus rhythm could be seen for real in clinical practice if a superior rhythm-control strategy was used.

Catheter ablation, a relatively new treatment for atrial fibrillation, has been shown to be feasible in a non-randomised heart failure patient cohort, with markers suggesting improvement of cardiac function.

This prospective clinical trial will enrol HF patients on optimal therapy, with documented persistent AF, and compare the strategies of catheter-ablation and medical rate control in a 1:1 randomised fashion.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age ≥ 18 years, < 80years
  • NYHA II-IV symptoms
  • Impairment of left ventricular systolic function (left ventricular ejection fraction estimated as ≤ 35% by radionuclide ventriculography)
  • Documented AF lasting for at least 7 days (persistent or permanent AF)

Exclusion criteria

  • CRT or ICD device implanted in the previous 6 months
  • AV nodal ablation within previous 3 months
  • Prior AV nodal ablation or complete heart block with a single chamber pacemaker
  • Contraindication to anticoagulation
  • Persistent thrombus in the left atrium despite anticoagulation
  • Active malignancy
  • Cerebrovascular accident within the previous 6 months
  • Reversible causes of AF including thyroid disorders, alcohol, recent surgery
  • Reversible causes of heart failure including acute myocarditis or alcohol
  • Cardiac events including myocardial infarction (MI), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), valve or coronary bypass surgery within the previous 3 months
  • Prior AF ablation procedure
  • Previous heart transplant, or on urgent heart transplant waiting list
  • Severe neuro-muscular disease
  • Creatinine clearance <30 ml/min
  • Serum bilirubin >50 micromol/L
  • Active participation in another research study
  • Unable to understand and comply with protocol or give written informed consent
  • Body mass index >35 (kg/m2)

Treatment and study plan

Medication to control ventricular rate in AF

Drug

Standard pharmacologic rate control. Current therapy will be adjusted to achieve rate-control targets of <80bpm and <110bpm on exercise (6 minute walk). Where necessary, additional medication will be given as per standard practice (digoxin or beta-blocker). Typical does: Digoxin 62.5-250mcg o.d. ; Bisoprolol 1.25-20mg o.d.; Carvedilol 3.125-50mg b.d. ; Nebivolol 1.25-10mg o.d.

Catheter Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

Procedure

Radiofrequency catheter ablation, which may include pulmonary vein isolation, atrial substrate modification, and/or linear ablation.

Other names: Radiofrequency catheter ablation, AF ablation, LA maze

Primary outcomes

  1. Peak oxygen consumption at cardiopulmonary exercise test

    Time frame: 12 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Left ventricular ejection fraction

    Time frame: 12 months

  2. Quality of Life score

    Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months

  3. 6 minute walk distance

    Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months

  4. Level of plasma neurohormones (including BNP)

    Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months

  5. Freedom from AF

    Time frame: 3, 6 and 12 months

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust

Other

Registry information

Official study title

A Randomised Trial to Assess Catheter Ablation Versus Rate-Control in the Management of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation in Chronic Heart Failure

Acronym: ARC-HF

Important dates

Study start
2009
Primary completion
2012
Study completion
2012
First posted
Apr 8, 2009
Registry last updated
Jul 12, 2012

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.