Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) by catheter ablation (CA) has become a widely accepted interventional treatment for patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) despite anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD). Classic thermal ablation modalities use radiofrequency energy or cryo-energy to create cardiac tissue lesions. Irreversible electroporation (IRE) using pulsed field energy (PFA) is a novel technology for cardiac tissue ablation. Initial studies have shown favorable outcome data in patients with AF treated by performing PVI using PFA. However, the freedom of AF has not yet proven superior to existing thermal ablation methods and appears similarly associated with suboptimal lesion durability, leading to electrical reconnection. The purpose of this study is to determine if freedom of atrial fibrillation may be improved by delivering more and better targeted pulsed field ablations.
Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) by catheter ablation (CA) has become a widely accepted interventional treatment for patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) despite anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD). Classic thermal ablation modalities use radiofrequency energy or cryo-energy to create cardiac tissue lesions. Irreversible electroporation (IRE) using pulsed field energy (PFA) is a novel technology for cardiac tissue ablation. Initial studies have shown favorable outcome data in patients with AF treated by performing PVI using PFA. However, the freedom of AF has not yet proven superior to existing thermal ablation methods and appears similarly associated with suboptimal lesion durability, leading to electrical reconnection. The purpose of this study is to determine if freedom of atrial fibrillation may be improved by delivering more and better targeted pulsed field ablations. Patients will undergo the standard catheter ablation procedure in accordance with good clinical practice, performing pulmonary vein islolation (PVI) with the FARAPULSE cardiac ablation system. In the control group PVI will be performed with 4 basket- and 4 flower-shaped applications of the catheter, while in the study group 2 olive-, 4 basket-, and 6 flower shaped applications will be delivered at each vein. All other procedural steps will be the same between groups. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion with a block size of 4 to the study arm or the usual care (control) arm. The primary study parameter for efficacy is the freedom of atrial arrhythmias after the 2-month blanking period up to 18 months after the procedure. The secondary study outcomes include the extent and position of pulmonary vein reconnection observed during redo procedures that are performed due to arrhythmia recurrence, which constitutes a study endpoint. Furthermore, the study also evaluates arrhythmia burden after the procedure in centers that routinely use photoplethysmographic remote monitoring as standard care for all their ablation patients.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
378
Standard of care 4 pulsed electrical field applications in basket shape and 4 applications in flower shape
Experimental treatment delivering 2 pulsed electrical field applications in olive shape, 4 in basket shape and 6 applications in flower shape
St. Antonius Hospital
Nieuwegein, Netherlands
Freedom of atrial fibrillation after a 2-month blanking period up to 18 months post procedure.
The primary efficacy outcome will be the freedom of arrhythmias lasting \>30 seconds after a single PVI ablation procedure from the blanking period of 2 months until 18 months follow-up after ablation. Any left-sided ablation procedure after a successful index procedure will count as treatment failure. An atrioventricular (nodal) reentry tachycardia (AVNRT/AVRT), or typical right atrial flutter occurring after the index procedure, will not count as treatment failure.
Time frame: Baseline, month 3, month 6, month 12, month 18
Procedural-up-to-30 days and 30 days up-to 18 months safety of increasing PFA application numbers
Compare the number of major adverse event between both study arms including (but not exclusively) cardiac tamponade, clinically relevant pulmonary vein stenosis, atrio-esophageal fistula, stroke, persisting phrenic nerve palsy, major bleeding (BARC criteria), hemolysis, cardiac arrest, death
Time frame: From procedure to 18-month follow-up
Quality of life differences between groups
QOL will be assessed with the Atrial Fibrillation Quality of Life Questionaire scoring system asking 18 question with a score on a scale of 1-7 and a range of 0-100. This will be compared between both study arms
Time frame: Baseline, month 3, month 6, month 12, month 18
The potential for hemolysis in relation to application number
Hemolysis will be assessed by testing urine-samples with hemosticks based on the grading system of the urine stick. In case of a positive urine-stick patients will undergo further diagnostic testing by blood test to determine severity of hemolysis. The number patients with hemolysis and the severity of hemolysis between the study arms will be evaluated
Time frame: Post procedure every 24 hours, up to 5 days post procedure for each individual patient
The durability of pulmonary vein isolation in case of a redo procedure
Mapping of the electrical activity of each pulmonary vein will performed in each patient undergoing a repeat ablation procedure. The number and pattern of electrical reconnection will be compared between both study arms
Time frame: Month 3, month 6, month 12, month 18.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.