Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT01038115

Study Comparing Pulmonary Vein Isolation With the Cryoballoon, Radiofrequency Energy, or Both in the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (AF)

The purpose of this study is to perform a prospective, randomised study investigating the safety and efficacy of cryoballoon catheter ablation compared with radiofrequency ablation, or both together in the treatment of paroxysmal AF.

The hypotheses for this study are (1) that cryothermal energy is as effective and safe as using radiofrequency energy in the treatment of paroxysmal AF and is associated with a better long term outcome, and (2) that use of both cryothermy and RF in combination is as effective and safe as using either radiofrequency energy or cryothermy alone and is associated with a better long term outcome.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Phase 4

Primary location

Barts and the London NHS Trust

London, EC1A 7BE, United Kingdom

About this study

Pulmonary vein isolation is an important treatment for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), particularly those in whom antiarrhythmic drugs are ineffective or cannot be tolerated. One method involves the use of radiofrequency energy and 3-D mapping system to produce a series of lesions (small burn areas) within the heart. Another method involves passing a balloon (called a cryoballoon) into the heart and freezing the parts of the heart muscle that the veins drain into. Both methods appear to be effective from known data. However, it is not known if use of either method alone or both together is the most effective. We aim to perform a prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing these three strategies.

Substudy 1: Use of cardiac MRI to evaluate ablation lesions. Some patients will also be asked to undergo an MRI scan of the heart before the ablation procedure, and again at three months and one year following the procedure. This will allow us to examine the potential role for MRI in imaging scar tissue formed by the ablation, and help us understand the time course of scar formation and changes to that part of the heart following the ablation.

Substudy 2: Platelet reactivity and activation in AF, and the impact of curative ablation. Blood and urine samples will be taken pre- and 3 months post ablation to see if platelet reactivity and activation are affected by AF compared to established normal ranges, and whether curative ablation impacts on this.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients with documented paroxysmal AF on at least 2 occasions and accepted for catheter ablation.

Exclusion criteria

  • Significant valvular disease
  • Previous left atrial ablation

Treatment and study plan

Atrial fibrillation ablation

Procedure

Comparison of three different techniques for pulmonary vein isolation

Primary outcomes

  1. Freedom from AF after a single procedure at 12 months.

    Time frame: 12 months

    Freedom from AF or any other atrial tachyarrhythmia lasting > 30 seconds (symptomatic or not) at 12 months following a single ablation procedure.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Complication rates, costs, fluoroscopy times, radiation exposure, and long term success. MRI substudy: sensitivity & specificity for determining ablation lesions. Platelet substudy: Platelet activation post ablation compared to baseline.

    Time frame: 0-12 months post procedure

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Barts & The London NHS Trust

Other

Registry information

Official study title

A Randomised Study Comparing Pulmonary Vein Isolation Using the Occluding Cryoballoon, Conventional Radiofrequency Energy, or Both in the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (AF).

Acronym: Cryo Vs RFA

Important dates

Study start
2008
Primary completion
2014
Study completion
2014
First posted
Dec 23, 2009
Registry last updated
Feb 19, 2014

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.