Cargando…
A randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: The ADVENT trial rationale and design
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 ablati...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10264259/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37323994 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hroo.2023.03.001 |
_version_ | 1785058287478112256 |
---|---|
author | Reddy, Vivek Y. Lehmann, John W. Gerstenfeld, Edward P. Mugglin, Andrew S. Schneider, Christopher W. Achyutha, Anitha B. Mansour, Moussa |
author_facet | Reddy, Vivek Y. Lehmann, John W. Gerstenfeld, Edward P. Mugglin, Andrew S. Schneider, Christopher W. Achyutha, Anitha B. Mansour, Moussa |
author_sort | Reddy, Vivek Y. |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10264259 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102642592023-06-15 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. Lehmann, John W. Gerstenfeld, Edward P. Mugglin, Andrew S. Schneider, Christopher W. Achyutha, Anitha B. Mansour, Moussa Heart Rhythm O2 Design Paper 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. Elsevier 2023-03-08 /pmc/articles/PMC10264259/ /pubmed/37323994 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hroo.2023.03.001 Text en © 2023 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Design Paper Reddy, Vivek Y. Lehmann, John W. Gerstenfeld, Edward P. Mugglin, Andrew S. Schneider, Christopher W. Achyutha, Anitha B. Mansour, Moussa A randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: The ADVENT trial rationale and design |
title | A randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: The ADVENT trial rationale and design |
title_full | A randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: The ADVENT trial rationale and design |
title_fullStr | A randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: The ADVENT trial rationale and design |
title_full_unstemmed | A randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: The ADVENT trial rationale and design |
title_short | A randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: The ADVENT trial rationale and design |
title_sort | randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the advent trial rationale and design |
topic | Design Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10264259/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37323994 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hroo.2023.03.001 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT reddyviveky arandomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT lehmannjohnw arandomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT gerstenfeldedwardp arandomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT mugglinandrews arandomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT schneiderchristopherw arandomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT achyuthaanithab arandomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT mansourmoussa arandomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT reddyviveky randomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT lehmannjohnw randomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT gerstenfeldedwardp randomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT mugglinandrews randomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT schneiderchristopherw randomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT achyuthaanithab randomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign AT mansourmoussa randomizedcontrolledtrialofpulsedfieldablationversusstandardofcareablationforparoxysmalatrialfibrillationtheadventtrialrationaleanddesign |