Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 9:08 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-01-01 @ 5:50 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT06866704
Status:
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2025-03-11
First Post:
2025-03-01
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Pulsed-Field Ablation Vs. Radiofrequency Ablation CombIned with Vein of Marshall Ethanol Ablation on Mitral Isthmus Block and Clinical Outcomes in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
Sponsor:
lingzhiyu
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Pulsed-Field Ablation Vs. Radiofrequency Ablation CombIned with Vein of Marshall Ethanol Ablation on Mitral Isthmus Block and Clinical Outcomes in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: the PRIME-AF Randomized Clinical Trial
Status:
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2025-03
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
PRIME-AF
Brief Summary:
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most common clinical arrhythmias, and catheter ablation serves as a critical therapeutic approach. For persistent atrial fibrillation, several proposed ablation strategies-including the 2C3L technique, BOX lesion sets, and substrate modification-remain highly controversial regarding long-term success rates. Multiple studies suggest that linear ablation beyond pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) often fails to achieve durable block due to incomplete ablation lines, which significantly contributes to postoperative recurrence of atrial arrhythmias.
In recent years, electrophysiologists have explored various methods to improve mitral isthmus (MI) ablation, such as combined endo-epicardial ablation and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) combined with Marshall vein alcohol ablation. While RFA combined with anhydrous alcohol injection into the Marshall vein enhances MI block rates, it is associated with prolonged procedure time, unpredictable ablation zones, and higher complication risks (e.g., coronary artery spasm, pericarditis).
Pulsed field ablation (PFA), an emerging non-thermal ablation technology, offers potential advantages such as tissue selectivity, shorter procedure time, and fewer complications. Studies report that RFA achieves near 100% immediate block rates; however, there is a lack of sufficient comparative studies on the efficacy and safety between these two ablation approaches. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes and safety profiles of PFA versus RFA combined with Marshall vein alcohol injection in patients with persistent AF.
In recent years, electrophysiologists have explored various methods to improve mitral isthmus (MI) ablation, such as combined endo-epicardial ablation and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) combined with Marshall vein alcohol ablation. While RFA combined with anhydrous alcohol injection into the Marshall vein enhances MI block rates, it is associated with prolonged procedure time, unpredictable ablation zones, and higher complication risks (e.g., coronary artery spasm, pericarditis).
Pulsed field ablation (PFA), an emerging non-thermal ablation technology, offers potential advantages such as tissue selectivity, shorter procedure time, and fewer complications. Studies report that RFA achieves near 100% immediate block rates; however, there is a lack of sufficient comparative studies on the efficacy and safety between these two ablation approaches. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes and safety profiles of PFA versus RFA combined with Marshall vein alcohol injection in patients with persistent AF.
Detailed Description:
None
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
False
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: