This prospective randomized study will assess the safety and efficacy of FIRM-guided ablation (FIRM+PVI) compared to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) without FIRM, for the treatment of symptomatic atrial fibrillation.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects over 2 millions Americans. AF may reduce cardiac performance and may result in thrombus formation in the left atrium and thromboembolic events, such as stroke. Ablation to eliminate the causes of this arrhythmia is increasingly performed since pharmacological therapy is suboptimal. Ablation currently targets triggers, by ablating left atrial areas outside the pulmonary veins (pulmonary vein isolation, PVI) in subjects with symptomatic AF who have failed drugs. Unfortunately, this has mixed success with the best outcomes being 50-70% freedom from AF at 1 year post ablation. A major issue with AF therapy is the lack of knowledge about critical regions of the heart that cause and sustain AF. A recent trial (STAR-AF2) showed that ablating regions empirically - i.e. without defining their role in AF(lines or fractionated electrograms) - did not improve patient outcomes compared to PVI alone (Verma et al, NEJM 2015). However, this leaves us with PVI that had a 50% success rate in that trial and in several other trials even for paroxysmal AF. We hypothesize that guiding ablation to critical arrhythmia-targeting zones will improve success over PVI alone. Specifically, we hypothesize that computational mapping of AF will find small regions called rotors and focal sources and ablate them, called Focal Impulse and Rotor Modulation (FIRM) ablation, shows promise at eliminating AF substrates. In many single center trials, FIRM improves results from PVI alone. This will be among the first randomized comparisons of FIRM ablation compared to PVI alone, and addresses an important question in the field.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
84
Trigger Based Ablation for AF, using Pulmonary Vein Isolation (PVI) alone
Substrate ablation for AF, via ablation of rotors and focal sources. Conventional (PVI) ablation will also be performed.
Veterans Affairs Medical Center
San Diego, California, United States
Stanford University
Stanford, California, United States
Long term success
Freedom from atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence during the 12 months after the initial AF ablation procedure, after an initial 3 month blanking (healing and stabilization) period.
Time frame: 12 months
Long-term freedom from AF/AT
Freedom from AF and atrial tachycardia (AT) during the 12 months after the initial AF ablation procedure, after an initial 3 month blanking (healing and stabilization) period. Atrial tachycardias (AT) include those arising from atrial regions where ablation was performed (such as left atrial tachycardia) as well as from regions where ablation was not performed (such as typical cavotricuspid isthmus dependent atrial flutter).
Time frame: 12 months
Total ablation time
Total ablation time will be recorded in all patients, measured as the cumulative application of energy from the first ablation lesion to the last lesion. These values will be compared between the FIRM-guided and conventional ablation groups. If ablation for AT/atrial flutter is pursued, this ablation time will be documented separately.
Time frame: 1 day
Quality of Life (comparing post-ablation to pre-ablation)
Quantitative EuroQol EQ5D scores post-ablation will be compared to those pre-ablation at all time points separately and together (ANOVA)
Time frame: 12 months
Adverse Events
Adverse events will be adjudicated by an independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee, who will determine whether they are or are not related to the procedure. The number and type of adverse events will be compared between FIRM-guided and conventional ablation groups.
Time frame: 12 months
Healthcare Utilization
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Hospitalization, other procedures and healthcare utilization, adjudicated by an independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee, will be compared between limbs.
Time frame: 12 months