Pulsed Field Ablation Versus Conventional Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation for Repeat PVI in Patients With Paroxysmal AF

Recruiting now · Not applicable

Conditions studied: Atrial Fibrillation Recurrent

In brief

Various methods exist for performing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), including thermal ablation and pulse-field ablation (PFA). However, in cases requiring a second PVI for recurrent AF, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is utilized in nearly 95% of instances post-acquiring a 3D high-density map from the left atrium (LA). Up to 85% of patients experiencing recurrent AF after the initial PVI exhibit pulmonary vein (PV) reconnections, often identified as the cause of AF. PFA has demonstrated its safety and efficiency compared to RFA as a swift technique for performing ablation. Yet, whether PFA or RFA stands out as superior or safer when applied for a second PVI remains unclear, as no randomized controlled trial has investigated this comparison. The proposed REPEAT-AF trial aims to randomize 154 AF patients experiencing recurrent AF after the initial PVI, assigning them in a 1:1 ratio to either RFA or PFA. Each patient will receive an implantable cardiac monitor to precisely detect any AF recurrences.

Key facts

Study ID
NCT06199180
Run by
University Medical Center Groningen
People needed
154
Starts
2024-09-20
Expected to finish
2028-09-01
Last updated by the study team
2024-12-10

Who can join

Age: 18 and older, up to 80. Sex: any. Healthy volunteers: not accepted.

Where it is running

Full record on ClinicalTrials.gov

Trial information comes from ClinicalTrials.gov and is refreshed daily. TrialsForMe does not provide medical care and does not run the studies it lists.