Status and phase
Conditions
Treatments
About
The aim of this randomized study is to evaluate the efficacy of two different approaches for conversion of persistent atrial fibrillation, the non-invasive one (external electrical cardioversion) and the invasive one (catheter ablation).
Full description
This randomized study compares two treatment strategies in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation: Cardioversion vs. catheter ablation. Cardioversion is a low risk standard treatment option for patients with persistent atrial fibrillation. However, mid- and long term efficacy (regarding the maintenance of sinus rhythm) is low. Catheter ablation is an invasive treatment which has been reported to result in up to 60-70% of patients in stable sinus rhythm. However, it is a potentially dangerous invasive procedure with potentially fatal complications.
Comparison: External cardioversion vs. catheter ablation
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
130 participants in 2 patient groups
Loading...
Central trial contact
Heidi L Estner, MD
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal