View clinical trials related to Atrial Fibrillation (AF).
Filter by:Patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation require treatment with different antithrombotic drugs. Oral anticoagulants are prescribed to reduce the risk of stroke associated with atrial fibrillation. Antiplatelet substances are prescribed after stent implantation to reduce the risk of adverse cardiac events such as myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis. Treatment with antithrombotic medications can cause bleeding complications, particularly when these substances are combined. The currently recommended standard strategy consists of treatment with 3 antithrombotic medications for at least 1 week up to one month, followed by treatment with two of these medications for up to 6-12 months after stent implantation. Thereafter, patients usually receive long-term treatment with only one drug, an anticoagulant. In the monotherapy group of this study, the investigators will investigate a strategy where only one antithrombotic drug will be used at a time. During the first month after stent implantation, the investigators will prescribe an antiplatelet medication, followed by an oral anticoagulant as monotherapy. This strategy might be associated with fewer bleeding complications, while protecting adequately against thrombotic events. In this study the investigators would like to investigate whether treatment with a single antithrombotic drug ("monotherapy strategy") is associated with benefits compared to the currently recommended combination therapy of antithrombotic medications ("standard-of-care strategy").
A study to evaluate the effect of abelacimab relative to placebo on the rate of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (SE) in patients with Atrial Fibrillation (AF) who have been deemed by their responsible physicians or by their own decision to be unsuitable for oral anticoagulation therapy.
The study is a prospective, two-arm, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint, multi-center study to investigate the impact of first line ablation in patients presenting at the emergency room with recent-onset paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation.
Atrial fibrillation is the most common cardiac arrhythmia. In atrial fibrillation, there is a risk that clots can form in the heart, especially in the left atrium. If these clots come loose, there is a risk of stroke. To prevent strokes, patients with atrial fibrillation and status post ICB can be treated with anticoagulants. This medication therapy prevents blood clots from forming in the heart, but can also cause bleeding. Another therapy option is the occlusion of the left atrium. After closure of the left atrium, only a short anticoagulation therapy is necessary until the occluder has healed. The aim of the study is to compare these two treatment approaches. In this study only already approved drugs and occlusion systems will be used.
Information gathered from the patients via a disease specific questionnaire will be married to data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR®). Details will be continuously analyzed and used to direct quality of care at our center. The institution is categorized as a low-volume institution for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary artery disease treatment as well as surgical and endocardial ablation for the management of atrial fibrillation (Afib). The association between operator volume and quality has primarily focused on rare complications, such as mortality. The aim is to highlight the advantages of receiving care close to home. A benefit of offering the procedures to treat diseases at centers that have lower volumes is to improve patients' outcomes while also providing more convenient access to quality care. The key outcome from the patients' experience is alleviation of their symptoms while increasing function and quality of life. To date, there have been no studies documenting the health status benefits of PCI and surgical / endocardial ablation for coronary artery disease and Afib, respectively with low- volume operators. In this study, the investigators sought to examine the feasibility of implementing patient-reported outcomes into clinical care and to demonstrate evidence of benefits, from patients' perspectives, of receiving treatment by low-volume operators.