Clinical Research Directory
Browse clinical research sites, groups, and studies.
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Extensive Electro-Anatomical Guided Pulsed Field Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
Sponsor: Shanghai Chest Hospital
Summary
This multicenter, randomized controlled trial aims to compare the efficacy and safety of extensive electro-anatomical guided pulsed field ablation (EXT-PFA) with traditional radiofrequency ablation (RF) in treating persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF). The trial seeks to determine if EXT-PFA, which integrates anatomical and electrogram-guided strategies, can provide superior outcomes in terms of safety and effectiveness compared to the standard RF ablation approach.
Official title: Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Electro-Anatomical Guided Pulsed Field Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation in the Treatment of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Key Details
Gender
All
Age Range
18 Years - 80 Years
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Enrollment
600
Start Date
2025-01-01
Completion Date
2026-12-31
Last Updated
2024-12-20
Healthy Volunteers
No
Conditions
Interventions
Pulsed field ablation
Utilizing pulsed field ablation (PFA), combining pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with extensive ablation based on anatomical landmarks (including posterior wall box isolation) and electrogram-guided ablation.
Radiofrequency ablation alone
Using conventional radiofrequency ablation technology, combines pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with extensive ablation based on anatomical landmarks (including posterior wall box isolation) and electrogram-guided ablation
Locations (1)
No. 241, West Huaihai Road
Shanghai, Shanghai Municipality, China