Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT07021313

Deliver mOre aPplications for More Durable Pulmonary Vein IsOlation

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) by catheter ablation (CA) has become a widely accepted interventional treatment for patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) despite anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD). Classic thermal ablation modalities use radiofrequency energy or cryo-energy to create cardiac tissue lesions. Irreversible electroporation (IRE) using pulsed field energy (PFA) is a novel technology for cardiac tissue ablation. Initial studies have shown favorable outcome data in patients with AF treated by performing PVI using PFA. However, the freedom of AF has not yet proven superior to existing thermal ablation methods and appears similarly associated with suboptimal lesion durability, leading to electrical reconnection. The purpose of this study is to determine if freedom of atrial fibrillation may be improved by delivering more and better targeted pulsed field ablations.

Recruiting

Interested in participating?

Request Info

Key information

Age range

18 year–80 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

St. Antonius Hospital

Nieuwegein, 3435 CM, Netherlands

Location status: Recruiting

Location contact

Isabelle N Bax, MD

CONTACT

[email protected]

0883200929 ext. +31

Isabelle N Bax, MD

SUB_INVESTIGATOR

Lucas VA Boersma, MD, PhD

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

About this study

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) by catheter ablation (CA) has become a widely accepted interventional treatment for patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) despite anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD). Classic thermal ablation modalities use radiofrequency energy or cryo-energy to create cardiac tissue lesions. Irreversible electroporation (IRE) using pulsed field energy (PFA) is a novel technology for cardiac tissue ablation. Initial studies have shown favorable outcome data in patients with AF treated by performing PVI using PFA. However, the freedom of AF has not yet proven superior to existing thermal ablation methods and appears similarly associated with suboptimal lesion durability, leading to electrical reconnection. The purpose of this study is to determine if freedom of atrial fibrillation may be improved by delivering more and better targeted pulsed field ablations. Patients will undergo the standard catheter ablation procedure in accordance with good clinical practice, performing pulmonary vein islolation (PVI) with the FARAPULSE cardiac ablation system. In the control group PVI will be performed with 4 basket- and 4 flower-shaped applications of the catheter, while in the study group 2 olive-, 4 basket-, and 6 flower shaped applications will be delivered at each vein. All other procedural steps will be the same between groups. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion with a block size of 4 to the study arm or the usual care (control) arm. The primary study parameter for efficacy is the freedom of atrial arrhythmias after the 2-month blanking period up to 18 months after the procedure. The secondary study outcomes include the extent and position of pulmonary vein reconnection observed during redo procedures that are performed due to arrhythmia recurrence, which constitutes a study endpoint. Furthermore, the study also evaluates arrhythmia burden after the procedure in centers that routinely use photoplethysmographic remote monitoring as standard care for all their ablation patients.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Be scheduled for PVI with the use of the FARAPULSE catheter ablation system AND
  • Have paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) documented in the last 6 months prior to enrolment OR
  • Had persistent atrial fibrillation but maintained in SR or converted to paroxysmal by antiarrhythmic drugs with no more than 1 cardioversion beyond 7 days in the past

Exclusion criteria

  • Cerebrovascular accident (CVA) in the last 6 months
  • More than moderate valvular disease that would require intervention
  • Cardiac catheter/surgical intervention in the last 3 months or scheduled
  • Atrial septal defect (ASD)/ patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure in the past
  • Left atrial appendage (LAA) closure in the past
  • Mechanical mitral valve
  • Non-adherence to oral anticoagulation in the 3 weeks prior to ablation
  • Renal disease with known eGFR<45 ml
  • Left atrial volume index (LAVI) >50 ml/m2 or left atrial diameter (LAD) >50 mm
  • Known contra-indication for catheter ablation
  • Known contra-indication for deep sedation or general anesthesia
  • Known pregnancy

Treatment and study plan

Pulmonary vein isolation by percutaneous endocardial catheter ablation using the FARAPULSE pulsed high voltage electrical field system in patients with atrial fibrillation

Device

Standard of care 4 pulsed electrical field applications in basket shape and 4 applications in flower shape

Pulmonary vein isolation by percutaneous endocardial catheter ablation using a pentaspline pulsed high voltage electrical field system in patients with atrial fibrillation

Device

Experimental treatment delivering 2 pulsed electrical field applications in olive shape, 4 in basket shape and 6 applications in flower shape

Primary outcomes

  1. Freedom of atrial fibrillation after a 2-month blanking period up to 18 months post procedure.

    Time frame: Baseline, month 3, month 6, month 12, month 18

    The primary efficacy outcome will be the freedom of arrhythmias lasting >30 seconds after a single PVI ablation procedure from the blanking period of 2 months until 18 months follow-up after ablation.

    Any left-sided ablation procedure after a successful index procedure will count as treatment failure.

    An atrioventricular (nodal) reentry tachycardia (AVNRT/AVRT), or typical right atrial flutter occurring after the index procedure, will not count as treatment failure.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Procedural-up-to-30 days and 30 days up-to 18 months safety of increasing PFA application numbers

    Time frame: From procedure to 18-month follow-up

    Compare the number of major adverse event between both study arms including (but not exclusively) cardiac tamponade, clinically relevant pulmonary vein stenosis, atrio-esophageal fistula, stroke, persisting phrenic nerve palsy, major bleeding (BARC criteria), hemolysis, cardiac arrest, death

  2. Quality of life differences between groups

    Time frame: Baseline, month 3, month 6, month 12, month 18

    QOL will be assessed with the Atrial Fibrillation Quality of Life Questionaire scoring system asking 18 question with a score on a scale of 1-7 and a range of 0-100. This will be compared between both study arms

  3. The potential for hemolysis in relation to application number

    Time frame: Post procedure every 24 hours, up to 5 days post procedure for each individual patient

    Hemolysis will be assessed by testing urine-samples with hemosticks based on the grading system of the urine stick. In case of a positive urine-stick patients will undergo further diagnostic testing by blood test to determine severity of hemolysis. The number patients with hemolysis and the severity of hemolysis between the study arms will be evaluated

  4. The durability of pulmonary vein isolation in case of a redo procedure

    Time frame: Month 3, month 6, month 12, month 18.

    Mapping of the electrical activity of each pulmonary vein will performed in each patient undergoing a repeat ablation procedure. The number and pattern of electrical reconnection will be compared between both study arms

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Isabelle N Bax, MD

CONTACT

[email protected]

+31883200929

Lucas VA Boersma, MD, PhD

CONTACT

[email protected]

+31883200900

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

R&D Cardiologie

Other

Registry information

Acronym: DOPPIO

Important dates

Study start
2025
Primary completion
2027
Study completion
2028
First posted
Jun 13, 2025
Registry last updated
Jun 30, 2026

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.