4.6 Article

Adenosine Following Pulmonary Vein Isolation to Target Dormant Conduction Elimination (ADVICE): Methods and Rationale

期刊

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 28, 期 2, 页码 184-190

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2011.10.008

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Pulmonary vein (PV) isolation (PVI) has emerged as an effective therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). However, AF recurs in up to 50% of patients, generally because of recovery of PV conduction. Adenosine given during the initial procedure may reveal dormant PV conduction, thereby identifying the need for additional ablation, leading to improved outcomes. The Adenosine Following Pulmonary Vein Isolation to Target Dormant Conduction Elimination (ADVICE) study is a prospective multicentre randomized trial assessing the impact of adenosine-guided PVI in preventing AF recurrences. Methods: Patients undergoing a first PVI procedure for paroxysmal AF will be recruited. After standard PVI is completed, all patients will receive intravenous adenosine in an attempt to unmask dormant conduction. If dormant conduction is elicited, patients will be randomized to no further ablation (control group) or additional adenosine-guided ablation until dormant conduction is abolished. If no dormant conduction is revealed, randomly selected patients will be followed in a registry. The primary outcome is time to first documented symptomatic AF recurrence. Assuming that dormant conduction is present in 50% of patients post PVI and symptomatic AF recurs in 45% of controls, 244 patients with dormant conduction will be required to obtain >90% power to detect a difference of 20%. Thus, a total of 488 patients will be enrolled and followed for 12 months. Conclusion: The ADVICE trial will assess whether a PVI strategy incorporating elimination of dormant conduction unmasked by intravenous adenosine will decrease the rate of recurrent symptomatic AF compared with standard PVI.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据