A Trial of Circumferential Pulmonary Vein Ablation (CPVA) Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy in for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation (AF) (APAF2)
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00340314|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : June 21, 2006
Last Update Posted : July 28, 2010
Background: Circumferential pulmonary vein ablation (CPVA) has been safely and effectively performed for treating paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF); however, its safety and efficacy, as compared with those of antiarrhythmic drug therapy (ADT), have never been formally assessed in a randomized controlled trial.
The Purpose of this study was to evaluate CPVA versus ADT in patients with PAF in a randomized controlled trial.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Atrial Fibrillation||Procedure: Circumferential Pulmonary Vein Ablation Drug: Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy||Phase 4|
Antiarrhythmic drug therapy (ADT) is currently considered as first-line therapy in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF).1 However antiarrhythmic drugs are frequently ineffective and can have serious potential adverse effects, thus often offsetting any advantage offered by the maintenance of sinus rhythm (SR).2,3 Data from our and other laboratories suggest that pulmonary vein ablation techniques may be a curative alternative for AF, obviating the need for ADT and/or anticoagulation in many patients.4-8 However, only preliminary and frequently non-randomized data exists for an evidence-based evaluation of catheter ablation as compared to conventional antiarrhythmic drug therapyADT.4,8 Thus, we conducted a controlled randomized trial (the Ablation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation [APAF] trial) to determine the long-term efficacy of circumferential pulmonary vein ablation (CPVA) in patients with paroxysmal AF as compared with ADT with flecainide, sotalol or amiodarone.
Methods: One hundred ninety-eight patients (age, 56±10 years) with PAF (duration, 6±5 years, mean AF episodes 3.4/month), were randomized to CPVA or to ADT with flecainide, sotalol or amiodarone. Ablation was randomly performed with the use of a standard or an irrigated tip catheter and with CARTO or NavX non fluoroscopic 3D systems guidance. Cardiac rhythm was assessed with daily transtelephonic transmissions over a 12 and 48 months follow-up. Crossovers to CPVA were allowed after 3 months of ADT.
Results: By Kaplan-Meier analysis, 86% of patients in the CPVA group and 22% in the ADT group were free from recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmias ([AT] P<0.001); a repeat ablation was performed in 9% of patients in the CPVA group for recurrent AF (6%) or atrial tachycardia (3%). At 1 year, 93% and 35% of the CPVA and ADT groups were AT-free while at 4 years only 72.7% patients assigned to RFA and 12.1% assigned to AADs reached the endpoint(p<0.001).Lower left ejection fraction, arterial hypertension and age independently predicted AF recurrences in the ADT group. CPVA was associated with a significant decrease in left atrial diameter (15±10%, P<0.01) and with fewer number of cardiovascular hospitalizations (p<0.01). Ablation with an irrigated tip catheter was more effective (P=0.03) with either the CARTO or NavX system (P=0.08). One transient ischemic attack and one pericardial effusion occurred in the CPVA group; side effects of ADT were reported in 23 patients.During the 4-year follow-up, 87 initially AADs patients required cross over to RFA with a steeper rate at 1 year (42 patients) and 19 of them progressed to persistent AF before switching. Considering repeat ablation and crossover, the overall success rate was 90% in RFA group and 80% in AAD group (p=0.0023, by log-rank test). New left AT developed in 9 patients requiring mapping and ablation in 7 patients. Quality of life was higher in the RFA group than in AAD group for all subscale scores (p<0.001) Conclusions: Compared to ADT, CPVA can safely and effectively cure PAF in many patients at one-year follow-up and this benefit is extended to 4 years.
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Enrollment :||198 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||None (Open Label)|
|Official Title:||A Controlled Randomized Trial of Circumferential Pulmonary Vein Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy in Treating Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation. The Ablation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation (APAF2) Trial|
|Study Start Date :||January 2005|
|Study Completion Date :||May 2006|
- The primary end point was freedom from recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmias ([AT], both AF and regular atrial tachycardia) during a 12 and 48 months follow-up . The first analysis was scheduled to be performed after the last enrolled patient complete.
- Presence of SR during 1-month intervals
- Percent of patients totally free of AF
- Number of cardioversions
- LV function
- Incidence of cardiovascular hospitalization
- Overall morbidity
- Left atrial size and function
- Thromboembolic and bleeding complications
- Efficacy and safety of two 3D mapping systems
- Efficacy and safety of two ablation catheters
- Procedure duration, length of hospital stay
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT00340314
|San Raffaele University Hospital|
|Milan, Italy, 20132|
|Principal Investigator:||Carlo Pappone, MD, PhD||San Raffaele University Hospital, Villa Maria Cecilia Hospital, Cotignola (Ravenna), Italy|
|Study Chair:||Vincenzo Santinelli, MD||San Raffaele University Hospital, Villa Maria Cecilia Hospital, Cotignola (Ravenna), Italy|