Comparison of External Event Recorders for Atrial Fibrillation Monitoring
Comparison of External Event Recorders With Implantable Monitor for Post Atrial Fibrillation Monitoring: Assessment of Cost and Efficacy
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Kansas
-
Kansas City, Kansas, United States, 66160
- University of Kansas Medical Center
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- All subjects who undergo radiofrequency ablation of paroxysmal AF.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Subjects with known allergy to sticky patches of event monitor
- Subjects with skin infection or other problems on the chest that interferes with monitor implantation
- Subjects who are scheduled for radiation therapy
- Subjects who are scheduled for therapeutic ultrasound (like lithotripsy)
- Subjects who are scheduled for MRI
- Subjects who are scheduled for a procedure that uses diathermy.
- Subjects, in the opinion of the investigator, are not suitable candidates for the study
- Subjects that do not have analog telephone line at home.
- Existing Cardiac Rhythm Management Device (e.g., pacemaker or ICD)
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Active Comparator: 1
Standard Event Monitor
|
Standard Event Monitor
|
|
Active Comparator: 2
Sleuth recorder
|
Implantable Sleuth Recorder
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Time Frame |
|---|---|
|
recurrence of atrial fibrillation
Time Frame: 6 months, 1 year, 2 years
|
6 months, 1 year, 2 years
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Time Frame |
|---|---|
|
cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between the two technologies and the 95% confidence interval for the ICER
Time Frame: 6 months, 1 year, 2 years
|
6 months, 1 year, 2 years
|
|
percentage of patients whose Coumadin is stopped prematurely due to inappropriate assumption of rhythm control
Time Frame: 6 months, 1 year, 2 years
|
6 months, 1 year, 2 years
|
|
percentage of patients who develop symptoms of stroke or transient ischemic attacks during follow up
Time Frame: 6 months, 1 year, 2 years
|
6 months, 1 year, 2 years
|
|
cost differences in follow up care between the two groups
Time Frame: 6 months, 1 year, 2 years
|
6 months, 1 year, 2 years
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Dhanunjuya Lakkireddy, MD, University of Kansas Medical Center
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Study Start
Primary Completion (Anticipated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Anticipated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimate)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimate)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 11566
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.