Dataset Information

A randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: The ADVENT trial rationale and design.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is an effective treatment for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). However, potential complications can occur due to the propagation of thermal energy into nontarget tissues adjacent to the targeted myocardium. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel ablation modality with the potential for preferential myocardial tissue ablation to minimize damage to collateral cardiac structures. A multielectrode pentaspline catheter has demonstrated safety and efficacy in treating PAF in single-arm, first-in-human studies.

Objective

The study sought to perform a randomized clinical trial to directly compare this PFA catheter with conventional ablation-either radiofrequency or cryoballoon ablation.

Methods

The ADVENT (Randomized Controlled Trial for Pulsed Field Ablation versus Standard of Care Ablation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation) trial is a multicenter, prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial to compare PVI using PFA vs conventional thermal ablation for drug-resistant PAF-with each site employing either (but not both) cryoballoon or radiofrequency ablation as a control condition. The sample size is adaptively determined based on Bayesian statistical methods. All patients will undergo PVI, and be followed for 12 months.

Results

The primary effectiveness endpoint is a composite of acute procedural success and freedom from any documented atrial arrhythmia recurrence, repeat ablation, or use of antiarrhythmic drugs after a 3-month postablation blanking period. The primary safety endpoint is a composite of defined acute and chronic device- and procedure-related serious adverse events. Both primary endpoints will be evaluated for noninferiority of the novel PFA system compared with standard-of-care thermal ablation.

Conclusions

By providing objective, comparative data, this study aims to scientifically determine whether the pentaspline PFA catheter is safe and effective for PVI ablation to treat drug-resistant PAF.

SUBMITTER: Reddy VY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10264259 | biostudies-literature | 2023 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: The ADVENT trial rationale and design.

Reddy Vivek Y VY Lehmann John W JW Gerstenfeld Edward P EP Mugglin Andrew S AS Schneider Christopher W CW Achyutha Anitha B AB Mansour Moussa M

Heart rhythm O2 20230308 5

<h4>Background</h4>Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is an effective treatment for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). However, potential complications can occur due to the propagation of thermal energy into nontarget tissues adjacent to the targeted myocardium. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel ablation modality with the potential for preferential myocardial tissue ablation to minimize damage to collateral cardiac structures. A multielectrode pentaspline catheter has demonstrated safety and ...[more]

PMID: 37323994

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceRecurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) commonly occurs after catheter ablation and is associated with patient morbidity and health care costs.ObjectiveTo evaluate the superiority of an augmented double wide-area circumferential ablation (WACA) compared with a standard single WACA in preventing recurrent atrial arrhythmias (AA) (atrial tachycardia, atrial flutter, or atrial fibrillation [AF]) in patients with paroxysmal AF.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a pragmatic, multicenter, prospective, randomized, open, blinded end point superiority clinical trial conducted at 10 university-affiliated centers in Canada. The trial enrolled patients 18 years and older with symptomatic paroxysmal AF from March 2015 to May 2017. Analysis took place between January and April 2022. Analyses were intention to treat.InterventionsPatients were randomized (1:1) to receive radiofrequency catheter ablation for pulmonary vein isolation with either a standard single WACA or an augmented double WACA.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was AA recurrence between 91 and 365 days postablation. Patients underwent 42 days of ambulatory electrocardiography monitoring after ablation. Secondary outcomes included need for repeated catheter ablation and procedural and safety variables.ResultsOf 398 patients, 195 were randomized to the single WACA (control) arm (mean [SD] age, 60.6 [9.3] years; 65 [33.3%] female) and 203 to the double WACA (experimental) arm (mean [SD] age, 61.5 [9.3] years; 66 [32.5%] female). Overall, 52 patients (26.7%) in the single WACA arm and 50 patients (24.6%) in the double WACA arm had recurrent AA at 1 year (relative risk, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.66-1.29; P = .64). Twenty patients (10.3%) in the single WACA arm and 15 patients (7.4%) in the double WACA arm underwent repeated catheter ablation (relative risk, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.38-1.36). Adjudicated serious adverse events occurred in 13 patients (6.7%) in the single WACA arm and 14 patients (6.9%) in the double WACA arm.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial of patients with paroxysmal AF, additional ablation by performing a double ablation lesion set did not result in improved freedom from recurrent AA compared with a standard single ablation set.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02150902.

Project description:IntroductionPulsed field ablation (PFA) was recently introduced for the treatment of symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) with the claim of selectively ablating the myocardium while sparing surrounding tissues. We present our initial experience with a PFA catheter for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and describe procedural findings and peri-procedural safety of the first 100 patients.Materials and methodsWe investigated 100 patients treated for symptomatic AF using the FARAWAVE PFA catheter (Farapulse, Menlo Park, CA, USA) between July 2021 and March 2022. Procedure workflow and electrophysiological findings at the time of ablation, peri-procedural complications, and operator learning curves are described.ResultsThe mean age of patients was 62.9 ± 9.4 years, 62% were male subjects and 80% had paroxysmal AF. The median CHA2DS2-VASc score was 1.5 (IQR: 1.0-2.0) and the mean left atrial volume index was 35.7 ± 9.6 ml/m2. In 88 (88%) patients, PVI alone was performed and in 12 (12%) patients additional ablation of the posterior wall was performed. 3D-electroanatomic mapping was performed in 18 (18%) patients. Procedures without mapping lasted for 52.3 ± 16.6 min. The mean number of applications per pulmonary vein (PV) was 8.1 ± 0.6. In all patients (100%), all PVs were confirmed to be isolated. The learning curves of the two operators who performed > 20 procedures showed a negligible variation of performance over time and practice did not significantly predict procedure time [Operator 1 (senior): R 2 = 0.034, p = 0.35; Operator 2 (junior): R 2 = 0.004, p = 0.73]. There was no difference between the procedure times between senior and junior operators (Operator 1: 46.9 ± 9.7 min vs. Operator 2: 45.9 ± 9.9 min; p = 0.73). The only complications observed were two cases of bleeding at the site of percutaneous access.ConclusionOur initial experience shows that use of the PFA catheter for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is safe, fast, and easy to learn.

Project description:ImportancePrevious studies evaluating the association of patient sex with clinical outcomes using conventional thermal ablative modalities for atrial fibrillation (AF) such as radiofrequency or cryoablation are controversial due to mixed results. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel AF ablation energy modality that has demonstrated preferential myocardial tissue ablation with a unique safety profile.ObjectiveTo compare sex differences in patients undergoing PFA for AF in the Multinational Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Postapproval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation (MANIFEST-PF) registry.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a retrospective cohort study of MANIFEST-PF registry data, which included consecutive patients undergoing postregulatory approval treatment with PFA to treat AF between March 2021 and May 2022 with a median follow-up of 1 year. MANIFEST-PF is a multinational, retrospectively analyzed, prospectively enrolled patient-level registry including 24 European centers. The study included all consecutive registry patients (age ≥18 years) who underwent first-ever PFA for paroxysmal or persistent AF.ExposurePFA was performed on patients with AF. All patients underwent pulmonary vein isolation and additional ablation, which was performed at the discretion of the operator.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from clinically documented atrial arrhythmia for 30 seconds or longer after a 3-month blanking period. The primary safety outcome was the composite of acute (<7 days postprocedure) and chronic (>7 days) major adverse events (MAEs).ResultsOf 1568 patients (mean [SD] age, 64.5 [11.5] years; 1015 male [64.7%]) with AF who underwent PFA, female patients, as compared with male patients, were older (mean [SD] age, 68 [10] years vs 62 [12] years; P < .001), had more paroxysmal AF (70.2% [388 of 553] vs 62.4% [633 of 1015]; P = .002) but had fewer comorbidities such as coronary disease (9% [38 of 553] vs 15.9% [129 of 1015]; P < .001), heart failure (10.5% [58 of 553] vs 16.6% [168 of 1015]; P = .001), and sleep apnea (4.7% [18 of 553] vs 11.7% [84 of 1015]; P < .001). Pulmonary vein isolation was performed in 99.8% of female (552 of 553) and 98.9% of male (1004 of 1015; P = .90) patients. Additional ablation was performed in 22.4% of female (124 of 553) and 23.1% of male (235 of 1015; P = .79) patients. The 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmia was similar in male and female patients (79.0%; 95% CI, 76.3%-81.5% vs 76.3%; 95% CI, 72.5%-79.8%; P = .28). There was also no significant difference in acute major AEs between groups (male, 1.5% [16 of 1015] vs female, 2.5% [14 of 553]; P = .19).Conclusion and relevanceResults of this cohort study suggest that after PFA for AF, there were no significant sex differences in clinical effectiveness or safety events.

Dataset Information

A randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: The ADVENT trial rationale and design.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: The ADVENT trial rationale and design.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets