An interventional study of Percutaneous closure of LAA and Catheter ablation of AF in Atrial Fibrillation, sponsored by Deutsches Herzzentrum Muenchen. Completed at 1 site in Germany. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 85 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2017-04-11.
Sponsored by Deutsches Herzzentrum Muenchen · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia, associated with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality1. The management of AF patients is aimed at reducing symptoms and at preventing severe complications associated with AF. In the last years, two new strategies have emerged with different objectives. In the PROTECT AF study2, percutaneous closure of the Left Atrial Appendage (LAA) with a closure device provided an alternative strategy to oral anticoagulation for stroke prophylaxis. The AFFIRM trial3 has shown that drug-based management of AF with a rhythm-control strategy conferred no advantage over a rate-control strategy in cardiovascular mortality and might be associated with an increased noncardiovascular death rate4. Catheter ablation has gained a greater place in the rhythm control strategy, showing superiority in maintaining sinus rhythm in comparison with AAD5. However, in persistent AF, repeat ablation procedures are necessary in up to 70% of patients to achieve sinus rhythm at a long-term follow-up6-7.
This prospective, randomized trial will compare the percutaneous closure of the LAA combined with a rate-control strategy to catheter ablation in the management of patients with persistent AF. Patients who are eligible for catheter ablation as well as LAA closure device implantation and are willing to participate in the study will be randomly assigned to catheter ablation or percutaneous closure of the LAA by a closure device implantation in the relation 1:1. The primary endpoint of the study is a composite endpoint at 12 months of all cause death, thrombo-embolic events, major bleeding (BARC type 3), re-hospitalisation and severe symptoms due to arrhythmias. Secondary endpoints include a composite endpoint of bleeding, a composite endpoint of thrombo-embolic events, cardio-vascular mortality, total duration of hospitalisation, sustained discontinued anticoagulation, quality of life improvement, use of Antiarrhythmic Drugs (AAD), total costs, freedom from arrhythmia and average ventricular frequency in 7-day holter ECG at 12 months.
The objective of the study is to assess the superiority of percutaneous closure of the LAA combined with rate-control to catheter ablation in patients with oligosymptomatic AF.
3,870 studies on the registry are indexed under Atrial Fibrillation; 924 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 120 is below the median of 144 across 2,380 interventional studies indexed under Atrial Fibrillation.
Browse Atrial Fibrillation studies →Deutsches Herzzentrum Muenchen is the lead sponsor of 112 studies on the registry; 10 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
Percutaneous closure of LAA
Procedure: Percutaneous closure of LAA
Catheter ablation of AF
Procedure: Catheter ablation of AF
Percutaneous closure of LAA
Catheter ablation of AF
A 12-month composite endpoint of all cause death, thrombo-embolic events, major bleeding BARC type III, re-hospitalisation and severe symptoms due to arrhythmias
Time frame: 12 months
The individual components of the primary endpoint
Time frame: 12 months
Discontinuation of anticoagulation
Time frame: 12 months
Quality of Life
Time frame: 12 months
Use of Antiarrhythmic Drugs
Time frame: 12 months
freedom from symptomatic arrhythmia
Time frame: 12 months
This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2017. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Deutsches Herzzentrum Muenchen