Skip to content

Interventional Strategies in Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: Percutaneous Closure of the Left Atrial Appendage Versus Catheter Ablation

Interventional Strategies in Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: Percutaneous Closure of the Left Atrial Appendage Versus Catheter Ablation

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01363895
Acronym
ISAR-AF
Enrollment
120
Registered
2011-06-02
Start date
2010-11-30
Completion date
2013-11-30
Last updated
2017-04-11

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

Conditions

Atrial Fibrillation

Keywords

atrial fibrillation, catheter ablation, percutaneous closure of LAA, intervention

Brief summary

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.

Interventions

PROCEDUREPercutaneous closure of LAA

Percutaneous closure of LAA

PROCEDURECatheter ablation of AF

Catheter ablation of AF

Sponsors

Deutsches Herzzentrum Muenchen
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 85 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. Patients with oligosymptomatic AF eligible for both interventions (CA and LAA closure device implantation). 2. Written, informed consent by the patient or her/his legally-authorized representative for participation in the study. 3. In women with childbearing potential a negative pregnancy test is mandatory.

Exclusion criteria

1. Left atrial thrombus 2. Other indication than AF for oral anticoagulation (valve prosthesis, pulmonary embolism, recurrent vein thrombosis) 3. Contraindication for oral anticoagulation 4. Severe valvular heart disease 5. Severe left ventricular systolic function (ejection fraction\<30%) 6. Malignancies or other comorbid conditions (for example severe liver, renal and pancreatic disease) with life expectancy less than 12 months or that may result in protocol non-compliance. 7. Pregnancy (present, suspected or planned) or positive pregnancy test. 8. Patient's inability to fully cooperate with the study protocol.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
A 12-month composite endpoint of all cause death, thrombo-embolic events, major bleeding BARC type III, re-hospitalisation and severe symptoms due to arrhythmias12 months

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
The individual components of the primary endpoint12 months
Discontinuation of anticoagulation12 months
Quality of Life12 months
Use of Antiarrhythmic Drugs12 months
freedom from symptomatic arrhythmia12 months

Countries

Germany

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026