Comparison of Operator-guided and Automatic Algorithm-guided Atrial Fibrillation Ablation

March 26, 2018 updated by: Marek Kiliszek, Military Institute of Medicine, Poland

Comparison of Operator-guided and Automatic Algorithm-guided Atrial Fibrillation Ablation. Randomized Open-labeled Study

Catheter ablation in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (i.e. pulmonary vein isolation) is now the most effective method of prevention of arrhythmia recurrence. Use of 3D electroanatomical system is now a golden standard.

Background hypothesis is that automatic algorithm collecting ablation points during pulmonary vein isolation (with certain catheter stability time, range of motion, and catheter-tissue contact force) prevents forming the gaps in the ablation line, thus preventing pulmonary vein reconnection and AF recurrence. The aim of the trial will be 1:1 comparison of the two methods of pulmonary vein isolation: with manual vs. automatic collection of ablation points using CARTO system and contact force catheter.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained supraventricular arrhythmia. It increases the risk of hospitalization and all-cause mortality. AF causes about 5-fold increase in the risk of stroke and 3-fold increase in the risk of heart failure.

Catheter ablation in the treatment of AF (i.e. pulmonary vein isolation) is now the most effective method of prevention of arrhythmia recurrence, especially in paroxysmal AF. Still, efficacy of one procedure in a 1-year follow-up is between 20 and 80%, depending on demographic and clinical factors (concomitant diseases), and on the form of the arrhythmia (paroxysmal-persistent), it also depends on the method of ablation used and the experience of the centre. In a big European registry including over 1,300 patients antiarrhythmic drugs-free efficacy of catheter ablation in AF in 1-year follow-up was about 40%. Major finding in patients with AF recurrence after catheter ablation is pulmonary vein reconnection, so decreasing the risk of pulmonary vein reconnections seems crucial to diminish the risk of AF recurrence. Several novel technologies have been proposed lately to improve efficacy of AF ablation, their real importance needs validation in a clinical trial.

Current standard is radiofrequency (RF) ablation with manual collection of ablation points (by operator or assistant). Automatic algorithm collect ablation points with additional criteria: catheter stability time, range of motion, and catheter-tissue contact force. The operator can see more precisely where the RF current has been applied and where are the gaps in the line.

Background hypothesis is that automatic algorithm collecting ablation points (with certain catheter stability time, range of motion, and catheter-tissue contact force) prevents forming the gaps in the ablation line, thus preventing pulmonary vein reconnection and AF recurrence. The aim of the trial will be 1:1 comparison of the two methods of pulmonary vein isolation: with manual vs. automatic collection of ablation points using CARTO system and contact force catheter.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

90

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Warsaw, Poland, 04-141
        • Military Institute of Medicine

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation qualified to catheter ablation according to current standards

Exclusion Criteria:

  • lack of informed consent
  • two previous pulmonary vein isolations

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Visitag group
Ablation using CARTO system. Visitag module: automated algorithm to collect RF ablation points using Visitag module. Criteria of ablation point: catheter stability range of motion ≤2.5mm, catheter stability time >15sec, contact force >5g over >50% of time. Optimal contact force suggested: 10-40g.
automated algorithm (Visitag)-based vs. manual collection of RF ablation points during AF ablation
Other Names:
  • RF ablation (CARTO system)
  • Pulmonary vein isolation (CARTO system)
Active Comparator: Control group
Ablation using CARTO system. Manual collection of RF ablation points by operator or by assistant. Optimal contact force suggested: 10-40g.
automated algorithm (Visitag)-based vs. manual collection of RF ablation points during AF ablation
Other Names:
  • RF ablation (CARTO system)
  • Pulmonary vein isolation (CARTO system)

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
AF recurrence
Time Frame: 1-year follow-up after index procedure
Number of AF recurrence after single catheter ablation during 12 months of follow-up.
1-year follow-up after index procedure

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Arrhythmia-free survival
Time Frame: Time to arrhythmia recurrence, follow-up 3-18 months after index procedure
Comparison of arrhythmia-free survival curves during the whole follow-up (even if extending over 1 year)
Time to arrhythmia recurrence, follow-up 3-18 months after index procedure

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Marek Kiliszek, MD, PhD, Military Institute of Medicine

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

April 1, 2015

Primary Completion (Actual)

January 1, 2017

Study Completion (Actual)

February 1, 2018

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

June 5, 2015

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 16, 2015

First Posted (Estimate)

June 19, 2015

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

March 29, 2018

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 26, 2018

Last Verified

March 1, 2018

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 1 (Other Identifier: Mobile Health and Wellness Program)

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.

Clinical Trials on Atrial Fibrillation

Clinical Trials on Ablation using CARTO system

Subscribe