Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute, St. david's Medical Center
Austin, Texas, 78705, United States
NCT Number: NCT02533843
Specific Aim: This prospective randomized study aims to compare the impact of three different catheter ablation approaches on long-term procedure outcome in terms of arrhythmia recurrence in persistent (PeAF) and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) patients. The three strategies to be evaluated are 1) ablation at sources guided by FIRMap (using RhythmView™ Workstation from TOPERA), 2) ablation at sources guided by FIRMap + conventional pulmonary vein antrum isolation (PVAI) and 3) Extended PVAI plus ablation of non-PV triggers and complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAE).
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Phase 3
Austin, Texas, 78705, United States
Specific Aim: This prospective randomized study aims to compare the impact of three different catheter ablation approaches on long-term procedure outcome in terms of arrhythmia recurrence in persistent (PeAF) and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) patients. The three strategies to be evaluated are 1) ablation at sources guided by FIRMap (using RhythmView™ Workstation from TOPERA), 2) ablation at sources guided by FIRMap + conventional pulmonary vein antrum isolation (PVAI) and 3) Extended PVAI plus ablation of non-PV triggers and complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAE).
Hypothesis: Extended PVAI plus ablation of non-PV triggers and CFAE results in better long-term procedure outcome in PeAF and LSPAF patients.
Background: The limited success rate of conventional ablation approaches in LSPAF has led to the search for the ideal ablation strategy (1). The main problem in the settings of PeAF and LSPAF is the lack of information on the best targets to ablate to achieve freedom from arrhythmia (2). Some strategies aim at elimination of AF triggers; some solely target CFAE for atrial substrate modification whereas others elect for isolation of PVs plus posterior wall along with ablation of non-PV triggers demonstrated by high-dose isoproterenol challenge with or without CFAEs. (2). The last option has been shown to be the best option so far in improving the freedom from AF at long-term follow-up (2, 3).
Recently Narayan et al, by using a computational mapping system that identifies 'rotors' (organized reentrant circuits or focal impulses), were able to achieve a success rate of 82.4% following ablation of rotors plus PVAI, at a median follow-up of 273 days, in a primarily paroxysmal AF population (4). The results of this study are promising and need to be tested in patients with PeAF and LSPAF.
Objective: To compare the long-term efficacy and safety of different ablation approaches in PeAF and LSPAF patients.
Study Design: This prospective study will enroll 120 consecutive PeAF/LSPAF patients and consenting patients will be randomized to any of the 3 groups (40 per group); Group 1: ablation at sources guided by FIRMap (using RhythmView™ Workstation from TOPERA) Group 2: ablation at sources guided by FIRMap + conventional pulmonary vein antrum isolation (PVAI) Group 3: Extended PVAI plus ablation of non-PV triggers and complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAE) Patients will be randomized to different treatment groups after the risks and benefits of each one are discussed in detail with them.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation with or without being guided by FIRMap (using RhythmView™ Workstation from TOPERA)
Other names: RFCA
Time frame: 1 year post-ablation
Any episode of AF/AT > 30 sec will be considered as a recurrence. Episodes that occur during the first 2 months after the procedure (blanking period) will not be considered as recurrence.
Time frame: 48 hours
complications associated with prolonged use of radiofrequency (RF) energy such as atrioesophageal fistula, perforation, cardiac tamponade, major hemorrhagic events
Time frame: Intra-procedural
AF termination, organization into AT or ≥10 % slowing
Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Research Foundation
Other
Acronym: OASIS
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.
NCT05820295
Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Atrial Fibrillation
New York, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05993897
Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Atrial Fibrillation
Aswān, Aswan Governorate, Egypt
View Trial DetailsNCT05357690
Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Atrial Fibrillation
Rochester, Minnesota, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05164718
Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Atrial Fibrillation
Drammen, Norway
View Trial Details