Long-term Outcomes in Long Standing Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
NCT ID: NCT04280042
Last Updated: 2022-05-02
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
104 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2020-02-01
2022-02-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Catheter Ablation Versus Thoracoscopic Surgical Ablation in Long Standing Persistent Atrial Fibrillation (CASA-AF)
NCT02755688
Curing Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure
NCT00292162
Substrate Guided Ablation Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation
NCT04657978
Node and Atrial Fibrillation Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
NCT01057485
Catheter Versus Thoracoscopic Surgical Ablation Strategy in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
NCT01385358
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The principal objective of the study is to compare the long-term effectiveness of thoracoscopic surgical ablation and percutaneous catheter ablation, the two procedures available for treatment of atrial fibrillation in patients with longstanding persistent AF (LSPAF). There is some evidence that thoracoscopic surgical ablation may be better than catheter ablation in keeping the patients in regular heart rhythm after a single procedure without use of antiarrhythmic drugs in short term. In this study we plan to monitor patients who have undergone these procedures for 3 years.
Our secondary objectives are focussing on patients who had more than one procedure and/or may be using medications in order to maintain regular heart rhythm during 36 months follow up.
We will therefore look at:
1. the effectiveness of a single procedure (catheter or surgical) in maintaining normal rhythm with use of antiarrhythmic drugs.
2. the effectiveness of multiple ablative procedures in maintaining sinus rhythm with and without use of antiarrhythmic drugs.
3. the proportion of patients who are still in AF but the time they spend in it is reduced by ≥75%.
We will also want to examine:
4. patient reported change in quality of life from baseline to 24 and 36 months after ablative treatment.
5. changes in levels of serum biomarkers from baseline to 36 months and how they relate to the freedom of arrhythmia
6. health and social care resource use and associated costs from baseline to 36 months
7. the cost-effectiveness of thoracoscopic surgical ablation compared with catheter ablation and update the health economic model developed for the main study (CASA AF RCT).
Our sample size calculations show that with an expected rate of attrition of around 20% we need 94-100 study participants to show the difference in the effectiveness of the two procedure with power of 80%, p= 0.05.
Patients participating in this extended follow-up study will attend two hospital appointments to coincide with 24 and 36 months post-ablation (± 6 months). These two visits will consist of:
1. clinical examination
2. review of concurrent medications and comorbidities
3. electrocardiogram (12 lead ECG )
4. blood test for routine biochemistry and collection of a sample for biomarkers analyses
5. completion of questionnaires to assess patients' quality of life: atrial fibrillation effect on quality of life (AFEQT), EuroQol (EQ5D5L) European Heart Rhythm Association score of atrial fibrillation (EHRA),
6. Health economic questionnaire to capture repeat procedures (ablation, direct current cardioversion and AF-related emergency care)
For the duration of the extended follow-up, once a week patients will download data from their implantable loop recorders which have algorithms that are specific for atrial arrhythmias (atrial fibrillation, atrial tachycardia, atrial flutter). Patients remotely download their data to the Medtronic (MyCarelinkTM) secure server. These data will be reviewed centrally every month by a dedicated Research Fellow. Patients will be contacted monthly by telephone to ensure compliance and to discuss any rhythm abnormalities detected in these data that require review of treatment/ management. Patients will be able to contact the research team if they experience symptoms of atrial arrhythmias. The implanted loop recorder data can be interrogated remotely, and appropriate advice regarding treatment given based on data review.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
OTHER
OTHER
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Thoracoscopic surgical ablation
Participants in CASA AF Trial who underwent thoracoscopic surgical ablation to treat their long standing persistent AF will be asked to continue downloading the data from their implanted loop recorder, attend two hospital appointments (at 24 and 36 months post ablation) to complete questionnaires, have an ECG, a blood test and report current medications they use.
No interventions assigned to this group
Cather ablation
Participants in CASA AF Trial who underwent conventional catheter ablation to treat their long standing persistent AF will be asked to continue downloading the data from their implanted loop recorder, attend two hospital appointments (at 24 and 36 months post ablation) to complete questionnaires, have an ECG, a blood test and report current medications they use.
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
OTHER
Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust
OTHER
Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Tom Wong
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust
London, , United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
271930
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.