Skip to content

Comparison of Ablation Strategy Based on Dominant Pathway Conduction Versus Conventional Approach in Typical Atrial Flutter: A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating Procedural Efficiency, Safety, and Efficacy

Comparison of Ablation Strategy Based on Dominant Pathway Conduction Versus Conventional Approach in Typical Atrial Flutter: A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating Procedural Efficiency, Safety, and Efficacy

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ChiCTR
Registry ID
ChiCTR2500107133
Enrollment
Unknown
Registered
2025-08-05
Start date
2025-08-20
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-08-18

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Atrial flutter

Interventions

Control group:Traditional ablation strategies involve ablation from the tricuspid annulus anchor point to the opening of the inferior vena cava.
Experimental group:First, ablate and reinforce the earliest excitation point of the tricuspid isthmus, then extend to the tricuspid anchor point and the opening of the inferior vena cava.

Sponsors

Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Age 18 to 80 years old; 2. Patients are recommended for catheter ablation treatment due to typical atrial flutter; 3. Atrial flutter can be persistent or paroxysmal, and at least one atrial flutter episode is documented on the 12-lead ECG; 4. The shape of the ECG should be dependent on the isthmus of the tricuspid valve, which can be counterclockwise or clockwise; 5. And the patient's electrophysiological examination confirmed that it was typical atrial flutter.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Previously treated with tricuspid isthmus ablation or atrial fibrillation ablation; 2. Atrial flutter is only recorded through outpatient clinics; 3. The atrial flutter morphology on the electrocardiogram indicates left atrial flutter; 4. History of atrial flutter with 1:1 atrioventricular conduction and hemodynamic instability; 5. Structural heart disease such as atrial septal defect; 6. Left atrial diameter (PLAX M-mode) >5.5 cm; 7. Severe left ventricular dysfunction (left ventricular ejection fraction = 40); 11. Extreme frailty (clinical frailty scale score of 7, 8 or worse); 12. Mitral valve position with metal prosthesis valve installed; 13. Installed cardiac resynchronization therapy equipment, pacemaker or implantable cardioverter defibrillator; 14. End-stage renal insufficiency (eGFR < 30 ml/min); 15. Pregnancy; 16. Valvular heart disease of any type assessed to be severe; 17. Previous valve replacement surgery or other prosthetic heart valve implantation; 18. Any previously documented evidence of atrial fibrillation.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Ablation time;

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
The effectiveness ;Surgical safety;Cardiac function indicators;

Countries

China

Contacts

Public ContactChen Yu

Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital

polyb@163.com+86 28 8739 3999

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ChiCTR (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026