Active clinical trials for "Atrial Fibrillation"

This study will compare right sided atrioventricular node ablation to left sided atrioventricular node ablation

Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery is a common intervention in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). The presence of new postoperative atrial fibrillation / atrial flutter (POAF) occurs in 15-40% of patients undergoing this procedure, with a high rate of complications, including increased hospital length of stay, with a consequent increase in the costs. In addition, the presence of POAF increases the rate of thromboembolic events such as stroke and mortality in the short and long term. Anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter (AF) lato sensu is already a well-established therapy in patients at high risk, defined by CHADS-VASC greater than or equal to 2. The use of direct-acting anticoagulants (DOACS) is standard therapy for those patients. In the POAF scenario, there is a recommendation for anticoagulation in high-risk patients for at least 30 days, however, despite being an entity with a poor prognosis in the short and long term, it is an undertreated entity. At present, there is no evidence of anticoagulant treatment of POAF with DOACS, and warfarin is the standard therapy. Warfarin is a drug that needs laboratory control of prothrombin time (PT) and anticoagulation bridge with other anticoagulants, usually using heparin and enoxaparin. We believe that because warfarin is the standard drug in this scenario, it is not prescribed on a regular basis, since it increases costs, length of hospital stay and is less effective than DOACS in AF lato sensu. Thus, the research project intends to compare the cost-effectiveness, assessed by QALY, related to the warfarin prescription strategy associated with bridge anticoagulation versus the rivaroxaban prescription in patients who presented POAF with a minimum duration of 12 hours or AF that requires intervention. Medications will be started during hospitalization. After randomization, anticoagulant medication will be started within 24 hours. The patient will be reassessed in 30 days and if there is no evidence of maintenance of AF, the anticoagulant medication will be discontinued and the standard treatment for CAD will be maintained. Secondary outcomes will be: clinical outcomes, such as: (1) Death; (2) stroke; (3) myocardial infarction (MI); (4) Readmission; (5) Systemic embolization; (6); Surgical reintervention; (6) Bleeding using the ISTH score; (7) Infection. The safety outcome will be the bleeding assessment according to the bleeding score of the ISTH (International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis). Considering that POAF is a prevalent entity and associated with a worse prognosis in the short and long term, as well as despite recommendations for guidelines to keep these patients anticoagulated, it is noted that the prescription of anticoagulation at hospital discharge is low. Considering that there is no clear evidence in studies on the use of DOAC in this population, we understand that the search for medications that lead to better cost-benefit, as well as better dosage and bleeding rates not lower than the use of warfarin, could lead to a higher rate prescribing anticoagulants for these patients, reducing costs, clinical and mortality outcomes.

The increased risk of Atrial fibrillation (AF) regarding thromboembolic stroke is predominantly due to the formation and embolization of clots from within the left atrial appendage (LAA). Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is a nonpharmacological strategy for stroke prevention in patients with AF. Data from randomized trials, including PROTECT-AF, PREVAIL, and Prague-17, have suggested that LAAO has comparable efficacy to warfarin or NOACs. Considering these results, LAAO was recommended by the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines as a non-pharmacological stroke prevention strategy for patients with NVAF who have contraindications or are unsuitable for OAC. The PROTECT-AF and PREVAIL trials stipulated the use of standardized antithrombotic medications which were designed to minimize the risk of stroke, systemic embolism, or device-related thrombosis. This antithrombotic strategy was subsequently endorsed by the guidelines, briefly, patients with LAAO were discharged on warfarin and aspirin for 45 days post-LAAO, if there was no leak or a leak ≤5 mm under transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) at 45-day follow-up, antithrombotic strategies shall switch to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) until 6 months post-LAAO, and then aspirin thereafter. Although LAAO was recommended by medical societies, previous patient-level meta-analyses have implied that compared with oral anticoagulation, LAAO had significantly more ischemic strokes, suggesting the inability of LAAO to prevent an ischemic stroke from sources beyond LAA. Will a combined strategy of LAAO and OAC further reduce the risk of stroke? The investigators hypothesized that a long-term low dose-Rivaroxaban (10mg daily) post-LAAO might be a potent supplement to the residue risk of ischemic stroke.

The purpose of this study is to assess the performance and safety of using the investigational catheter.

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness (prevention of thromboembolic events) and safety (major bleeding) of adding oral anticoagulation (OAC) to background antiplatelet therapy in patients who develop new-onset post-operative atrial fibrillation (POAF) after isolated coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. All patients with a qualifying POAF event, who decline randomization, will be offered the option of enrollment in a parallel registry that captures their baseline risk profile and their treatment strategy in terms of anticoagulants or antiplatelets received. These patients will also be asked to fill out a brief decliner survey.

A multicentre, parallel group, two arm, single-blinded randomized clinical trial, assessing the efficacy of a patient-tailored catheter ablation (CA) strategy guided by atrial scar mapping in addition to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) when compared to PVI alone in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF).

The aim of this project is to determine whether the entire intervention (Mindfulness meditation, AF education, and weekly phone visits) that is nurse delivered to individuals with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation is more effective than a combination, single or no intervention in the reduction of overall AF symptoms, anxiety, and negative illness perception; or the improvement of quality of life (QOL) and functional status.

Non-valvular (NV) atrial fibrillation (AF) increases the risk of stroke by approximately fivefold. The atrial thrombi associated with AF are seen within the left atrial appendage (LAA) in most cases (> 90%). Anticoagulation with a vitamin-K antagonist (VKA) is recommended to prevent thromboembolic complications and to resolve thrombi. Non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have replaced the VKA for the thromboprophylaxis in patients with NVAF since 2010. Therefore, NOAC can be the excellent alternative to VKA concerning resolving preexisting LAA thrombi because of its rapid onset of action and no need of bridging with heparin. However, there is still lack of data regarding the optimal treatment for patients with AF and thrombi in LAA with NOAC. There are only several case reports of the efficacy of NOACs in resolving LAA thrombi available. Edoxaban, which has data showing efficacy and safety in thromboprophylaxis, can be the new option for treatment of patients with AF and LAA thrombi. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of Edoxaban in resolving the LAA thrombi, which is related with nonvalvular AF.

Atrial Fibrillation (AF) affects 200,000 Canadians and increases risk of stroke, morbidity and mortality. Having a stroke can affect a patient's ability to speak, eat, walk, work, care for themselves, and interact with others. Not only can it ruin one's life, but it can also be fatal. A stroke occurs when blood flow to the brain is blocked by a clot, depriving brain cells of oxygen. In people with atrial fibrillation, blood flow is sluggish in the top chambers of the heart, and blood clots can form there. When a piece of a clot breaks off, it can travel to the brain and cause a stroke. That's where blood thinners come in. Blood thinners, or anticoagulants, decrease the chances of blood clots forming in the heart, reducing the risk of stroke. Studies show that blood thinners are highly effective at reducing the risk of stroke by up to 95%. The conventional blood thinner is warfarin, taken by mouth. Warfarin requires regular blood tests to make sure a patient getting the correct dose. The patient also may have to avoid certain foods since the medication can interact with them. Newer blood thinners, known as direct-oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are available, which do not require regular blood tests and do not interact with foods. Two of the new blood thinners are called rivaroxaban and apixaban. Like warfarin, they can be taken by mouth, and studies have shown them to be as effective as warfarin. Both rivaroxaban and apixaban have been approved for stroke prevention in AF by Health Canada. However, there have been no direct head-to-head comparisons of these two anticoagulants, meaning comparative safety data is not available. Increasing use of DOACs for stroke prevention in AF and patient values around bleeding highlight the need for a comparison trial to ensure patients receive the anticoagulant with the greatest balance of benefit to potential harm. The trial is to assess bleeding rates and superiority of using apixaban versus rivaroxaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

Long-term aspirin (ASA) is the standard recommended antithrombotic therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD), especially following stenting (Class I, Level A). Long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) is the standard antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) associated with one or more risk factor for stroke (Class I, Level A). During the first year following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), several studies evaluating the combination of OAC treatment and antiplatelet therapy are either already published or ongoing. At distance of the index ACS and/or PCI, patients with stable CAD and concomitant AF remain at particular high-risk of ischemic (3 to 4 times higher as compared to patients with stable CAD without AF) and bleeding events. Antithrombotic management of these patients is subsequently highly challenging in clinical practice. The European task force suggests that the use of a full-dose anticoagulant monotherapy without any antiplatelet therapy should be the default strategy in such patients with both, AF and stable CAD. However, evidences are sparse and weak to support such a strategy (only observational studies with many biases) and no randomized trial has assessed this question. These patients, especially those at high-risk of recurrent ischemic events (post- ACS, diabetes, multivessel CAD…) may benefit from the combination of OAC and aspirin at long-term. Indeed the crude event rate of ischemic events is much higher than the crude event rate of bleeding in this specific population. Ischemic events are 2 to 3 times more frequent than bleeding in daily practice. The benefit/risk ratio of these two different strategies (ASA in combination with OAC vs. OAC alone) in patients at high-risk of recurrent coronary and vascular events remains unknown. Dual therapy with full-dose anticoagulation and ASA may lead to higher risk of major bleeding, while stopping ASA in stabilized high-risk patients after PCI may lead to poorer outcome regarding ischemic events. The coordinating investigators therefore designed a double blind placebo controlled trial in order to assess the optimal antithrombotic regimen that should be pursued long-life in this subset of patients.