Contact Force Guided Ablation Versus Conventional Pulmonary Vein Isolation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation

Status

Completed

Phases

Study type

Interventional

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT02816268

Acronym

FULL CONTACT

Enrollment

120

Registered

2016-06-28

Start date

2012-09-30

Completion date

2015-11-30

Last updated

2016-06-28

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

Conditions

Improving Outcome After Pulmonary Vein Isolation

Brief summary

The investigators prospectively investigate the differences between contact-force guided pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and conventional pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) with respect to adenosine guided unmasking of dormant conduction, procedural and clinical outcome.

Interventions

OTHERPulmonary vein isolation

Study design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Intervention model

PARALLEL

Primary purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

NONE

Eligibility

Healthy volunteers

Inclusion criteria

* Patients (\>=18 und \< 80 years) with symptomatic paroxysmal AF * At least one unsuccessful attempt of antiarrhythmic drug (betablocker or class I oder III). * Oral anticoagulation with phenprocoumone, warfarine or DOAKs for at least 4 weeks prior to ablation with weekly documented INR \> 2.. * Withdrawal of antiarrhythmic drugs at least 3 half times prior to ablation except amiodarone.

Exclusion criteria

* Left atrial thrombus * Contraindications for oral anticoagulation or adenosin

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Number of reconnected pulmonary vein after ablation and a waíting period of 20min	20min after procedure

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Time to first documented recurrence of atrial fibrillation	12 month
Complications due to ablation	30 days
Number of reconnected pulmonary veins	12 month

Countries

Germany

Outcome results

None listed

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