Clinical Trials Directory

Trials / Unknown

UnknownNCT01385358

Catheter Versus Thoracoscopic Surgical Ablation Strategy in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

A Study to Assess Catheter Ablation Versus Thoracoscopically Assisted Surgical Ablation in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

Status
Unknown
Phase
N/A
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
60 (estimated)
Sponsor
Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust · Academic / Other
Sex
All
Age
18 Years – 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
Accepted

Summary

Atrial fibrillation(AF)is the commonest arrhythmia worldwide and can lead to significant morbidity and mortality, posing an increasing public health burden. Restoration of sinus rhythm (SR) is the preferred strategy in symptomatic patients but outcomes with anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD) are poor. The alternatives to AAD are two-fold.Firstly, catheter ablation (CA)- a technique that uses catheters (thin tubes) to deliver small 'heat lesions' to areas of the heart to eliminate AF. Secondly, surgical ablation, where multiple incisions are made in the atria to restore SR. Long term results from this traditional surgical approach are excellent however as it is technically difficult open-heart procedure with significant morbidity and mortality, it is seldom used. CA is very effective in restoring SR in the early stages of AF when it is a paroxysmal (intermittent) rhythm disturbance. If not treated at this stage AF inevitably evolves into a more persistent or permanent state and becomes more difficult to treat with CA. Therefore, the optimum approach to treat patients with symptomatic long standing persistent AF has yet to be determined and remains a key area of on-going research. New minimally invasive, thoracoscopically assisted surgical(closed-heart)approaches have recently developed which ablate a wide area around the pulmonary veins, and may offer advantages over the best current strategies in CA. There are also clear advantages for patients with greater safety and less discomfort when compared to traditional surgical open-heart procedures. At present there is small amount of encouraging data on this thoracoscopic surgical technique but there is no data comparing these two modalities of treatment in persistent AF patients. The investigators therefore wish to prospectively investigate the safety and efficacy of this thoracoscopic surgical technique and compare with CA in this group of patients. MRI scanning will also be used to visualise the effects of ablation by analysis of scar formation. The study hypothesises that thoracoscopics surgical ablation is a

Detailed description

This will be a pilot, prospective, observational study of catheter ablation compared with thoracoscopically assisted, surgical ablation strategies using a case control design. The study population will be patients between the ages of 18 and 80 with symptomatic long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (≥1≤5 years) and good left ventricular function where at least one anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) has failed, or where such drugs are contraindicated or not tolerated. Thoracoscopically Assisted Surgical Ablation Group Patients assigned to this group will undergo minimally invasive, thoracoscopically assisted, surgical ablation to isolate the pulmonary veins (PVI) using a radiofrequency (RF) clamp device. This will include ganglionated plexi ablation +/- LAA excision/exclusion. Catheter Ablation Group Patients will undergo pulmonary vein isolation, linear and electrogram based ablation. Recurrences Only one redo procedure is allowed for atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrences in the 12 month follow-up period.

Conditions

Interventions

TypeNameDescription
PROCEDUREThoracoscopically Assisted Surgical AblationSurgical AF ablation including pulmonary vein isolation, gananglionated plexi ablation +/- LAA excision/exclusion.
PROCEDURECatheter AblationIn this arm, study subjects will undergo conventional catheter ablation as their index procedure. This will include pulmonary vein isolation, linear and electrogram based ablation.

Timeline

Start date
2011-04-01
Primary completion
2013-10-01
Completion
2013-10-01
First posted
2011-06-30
Last updated
2011-06-30

Locations

1 site across 1 country: United Kingdom

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT01385358. Inclusion in this directory is not an endorsement.