View clinical trials related to Atrial Fibrillation.
Filter by:Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia, and its prevalence is increasing with the aging population [1]. As the prevalence of AF is significantly rising among the population over 70-80 years old and considering the population is at high risk of AF complications such as stroke, oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy is necessary among these subjects [1-3]. OAC decreases the risk of stroke and systemic thromboembolism with improved mortality among AF patients. The introduction of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) has led to more effective and safe anticoagulation therapy among Asian patients [4,5]. Among different types of NOAC, the prescription of apixaban has been increasing based on robust safety data. The ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation), phase three clinical trial on apixaban., showed efficacy and safety of apixaban compared to warfarin among 18,000 patients worldwide [6]. However, this study only included 5.5% (986) Asian patients. Of patients requiring OAC, those of old age, low body weight, or decreased renal function are at 'high risk' of stroke, systemic thromboembolism, and major bleeding events [4, 7-9]. In Korea, among patients prescribed with NOAC due to AF, 35-40% were older than the age of 75 years old, 35% had bodyweight ≤ 60kg and 25-30% had decreased renal function (Creatinine clearance ≤ 60ml/min) [10]. Although apixaban has proved safe in old age, low bodyweight decreased renal function in ARISTOTLE subgroup analyses, the efficacy and safety data on Asian AF patients with high-risk factors is limited [11-14]. In this study, the investigators aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of apixaban among high-risk Korean patients in old age, low bodyweight or decreased renal function using a multicenter observational study design
The purpose of this study is to demonstrate safety and effectiveness of the ablation system (THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH SF [STSF] catheter and TRUPULSE generator) when used for isolation of the atrial pulmonary veins (PVs) in treatment of participants with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF).
Background: Thoracoscopic ablation is an effective treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation. Nowadays, 2 types of ablative devices are available in clinical practice allowing one to perform the thoracoscopic procedure - Medtronic and AtriCure. However, the contemporary clinical literature does not have enough data that would compare these two approaches. Aims: to perform a comparative analysis of the short-term results of two minimally invasive strategies in thoracoscopic ablation for atrial fibrillation. Methods: The retrospective study was performed in which included 232 patients underwent thoracoscopic ablation for atrial fibrillation in two clinical centers for the period from 2016 to August 2021. The patients were divided into 2 groups. The first group was represented by those patients to whom a Medtronic device was applied (n=140), the second group was treated with an AtriCure device (n=92). The patients were comparable in their age, gender, initial severity of the condition. The follow-up consisted of laboratory tests, chest Х-ray, electrocardiography, 24-hour Holter monitor, echocardiography. The structure and prevalence of intraoperative and postoperative complications, specifics of the postoperative period were compared between the two groups.
In this study, the investigators evaluated the association between various measures of adiposity [BMI and waist circumference (WC)] and clinical outcomes in Asian patients with AF who were prescribed OAC, using a nationwide population based cohort.
The purpose of this study is to verify the safety and efficacy of the cardiac pulse ablation system in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation to provide the basis for product registration and clinical application. The trial will be conducted at a clinical center with appropriate clinical cases, and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation procedures will be performed by an authorized investigator using the trial product. The effectiveness and safety of the cardiac pulse ablation system in the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation will be verified by collecting the treatment success rate, immediate ablation success rate, procedure time and device use evaluation within 12 months after the procedure.
The HELIOSTARTM catheter (Biosense Webster) is a new technology for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in atrial fibrillation (AF), combining radiofrequency (RF)-ablation and 3D-mapping visualization with the concept of "single-shot"-ablation device. This study evaluates the operator learning curve und procedural outcome during implementation of the HELIOSTARTM.
This is an early feasibility study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Laminar Left Atrial Appendage Closure System to treat patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation that cannot take, or a have a reason to seek an alternative, to anticoagulant medications.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common complication associated with cancer but the risk of AF according to the cancer localization and status as well as the risk of thromboembolisms, bleedings and mortality are poorly known. The objective of this study is to use a very large French nationwide cohort to adress thèses questions.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the long term off-Antiarrhythmic Drug (AAD) effectiveness of Biosense Webster, Inc. Irreversible Electroporation (BWI IRE) system in treatment of participants with symptomatic drug refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF).
Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is an effective treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). Currently, Medtronic Arctic Front Cryoballoon is the most frequently used single shot technology and hence is the benchmark for upcoming technologies. A novel method, pulse-field ablation (PFA) using the FARAPULSE catheter, has recently been introduced (FARAPULSE PFA, Boston Scientific). However, whether FARAPULSE PFA provides effectiveness similar to the standard-of-practice Medtronic Arctic Front Cryoballoon is yet to be investigated. Given that FARAPULSE PFA has shown in studies not to cause any of the severe complications reported in association with traditional PVI while being highly effective, it might be even safer and more effective for use in AF ablation procedures. The aim of this trial is to compare the efficacy and safety of PVI using FARAPULSE PFA (Boston Scientific) and the Arctic Front Cryoballoon (Medtronic) in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal AF undergoing their first PVI. This is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized controlled, open-label trial with blinded endpoint adjudication. Given that the Medtronic Arctic Front Cryoballoon is the standard-of-practice for PVI and the FARAPULSE PFA is the novel technology, this trial has a non-inferiority design. The null hypothesis with regards to the primary efficacy endpoint is that the FARAPULSE PFA (Boston Scientific) shows lower efficacy compared to the Arctic Front Cryoballoon (Medtronic) and that therefore more episodes of first recurrence of any atrial arrhythmia between days 91 and 365 will be observed in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal AF undergoing their first PVI. Hence, the alternative hypothesis postulates that the FARAPULSE PFA is non-inferior to the Arctic Front Cryoballoon. Rejection of the null hypothesis is needed to conclude non-inferiority.