Active clinical trials for "Atrial Flutter"

Demonstrate the safety, feasibility and usability of the EPD D700 system, for the first time in humans, in subjects undergoing ablation for the treatment of atrial flutter. Prospective, single-center, non-randomized, open label, single arm study. Ten consented subjects who are scheduled to undergo ablation due to atrial flutter. All subjects will undergo baseline assessment; intervention (standard fluoroscopy guided RF ablation procedure) and post procedure follow up. All subjects will have a follow up visit within 24 hours post procedure.

The IMPACT Study will investigate the potential clinical benefit of the combined use of BIOTRONIK Home Monitoring (HM) technology and a predefined anticoagulation plan compared to conventional device evaluation and physician-directed anticoagulation in patients with implanted dual-chamber defibrillators or cardiac resynchronization therapy devices.

The purpose of the ArcticLine Feasibility Study is to collect preliminary safety and effectiveness data on the ArcticLine Catheter.

Acute atrial fibrillation and flutter (AAFF) is characterized by rapid heart rates with onset less than seven days. It's the most common type of palpitation treated in the Emergency Department (ED). Some Canadian ED's will discharge 95% of AAFF patients whereas others admit up to 40%. With hospital and ED crowding, discharge is the most optimal, effective and safe strategy. Our aim is to improve the care and reduce the length of stay (LOS) of ED AAFF patients, while decreasing unnecessary hospitalizations. First, the investigators must understand the local barriers. In the previous study, the investigators conducted interviews of emergency physicians, cardiologists and AAFF patients. In Project 1b, the investigators created the CAEP ED AAFF Guidelines Checklist to assist physicians to manage AAFF more efficiently and safely. The Guidelines are comprised of two algorithms and four sets of checklists for ED assessment and management. They have been endorsed by CAEP and are published in CJEM. The investigators are now planning Project 2 in which the investigators will conduct a cluster [group] randomized trial at 11 Canadian EDs and enroll 1,300 patients over thirteen months. The investigators are not randomizing individual patients or doctors; instead the investigators are randomizing the start date of individual hospitals. Our goal is to introduce the new Guidelines into these hospitals to improve the care of AAFF patients. The investigators hope to improve AAFF management, leading to a significant decrease in hospital admissions and ED LOS. Central to our plans will be engagement of our two patient partners. Our behaviorally optimized intervention will be developed using state-of-the-art implementation science approaches informed by the results of Project 1a. The investigators will also undertake within-project and end-of-project knowledge translation and implementation (KTI) strategies to facilitate scale up and roll out of our program to ED departments in small, medium, and large hospitals across Canada (future Project 3). Ultimately the investigators expect to improve ED practices and decrease AAFF admissions and LOS, without increasing visits.

Catheter ablation is now routinely used in the management of heart rhythm disorders. One of the problems with the approach is that it has not been possible to determine whether the ablation catheter is in direct contact with the heart tissue or not. This is important because too much contact has safety implications and too little means that the therapy will be ineffective. Recently two different technologies have been developed to determine contact. Currently it is not know if one is superior to the other, and the objective of this trial is to determine whether there is a difference when treating a rhythm called atrial flutter.

To assess the acute and long-term efficacy of half-normal saline compared to normal saline for irrigation of open-irrigated catheters during catheter ablation for the treatment of cavotricuspid isthmus dependent atrial flutter.

Few studies are specifically designed to address health concerns relevant during pregnancy. The consequence is a lack of evidence on best clinical practice. This includes mothers and their babies when pregnancy is complicated by an abnormally fast heart rate up to 300 beats per minute due to supraventricular tachyarrhythmia (SVA) in the unborn baby (fetus). Although fetal SVA, including atrial flutter (AF) and other forms of supraventricular tachycardia (SVT), is the most common cause of intended in-utero fetal therapy, none of the medication used to date has been evaluated for their effects on the mother and her baby in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). As a consequence, physicians need to make decisions about the management of such pregnancies without any evidence from controlled trials on drug efficacy and safety and no consensus among specialists for the optimal management. The Fetal Atrial Flutter and Supraventricular Tachycardia (FAST) Therapy Trial is a prospective multi-center trial that addresses this knowledge gap to guide future fetal SVA therapy to the best of care. Study components of FAST include three prospective sub-studies to determine the efficacy and safety of commonly used transplacental drug regimens in suppressing fetal AF without hydrops (RCT A), SVT without hydrops (RCT B), and SVT with hydrops (RCT C). All RCTs are open label phase III trials of standard 1st line therapy, which either is started as monotherapy (no hydrops) or as dual therapy (hydrops). The primary study aim is the probability of a normal pregnancy outcome after treatment start with Digoxin or Sotalol (AF without hydrops); Digoxin or Flecainide (SVT without hydrops); and Digoxin plus Sotalol or Digoxin plus Flecainide (SVT with hydrops).

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a standard treatment option for cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI) dependent atrial flutter. We plan to perform a randomized prospective trial comparing the efficacy of contact force (CF) guided CTI ablation against catheter ablation with the operator blinded to contact force parameters.

Atrial Fibrillation and atrial flutter (AF/FL) is the usually irregular beating of the heart and is a rapidly growing cause of hospitalization. Between 1993 to 2007 AF/FL hospitalizations have increased 203% compared to a 71% increase for all hospitalizations. Changing procedure management such as ablation, transesophageal have had a minimal impact on the trends and there is a need to evaluate Emergency Department (ED) management options of AF/FL that may decrease hospitalizations. The most commonly used medications to control heart rate are metoprolol (MET), a beta blocker, or diltiazem (DT), a calcium channel blocker. Beta blockers are medications that cause the heart to beat more slowly and with less force. DT also helps blood vessels open up to improve blood flow. Both DT and MET are used alone or together with other medicines to treat severe chest pain (angina), high blood pressure (hypertension) or rapid heartbeat. Both are equally acceptable according to recent guidelines for AF/FL. There are limited studies comparing MET to DT for rate control for AF/FL. The initial goal for AF/FL management in the Emergency Department is usually rate control. The most commonly used rate control medications are metoprolol (MET), a beta blocker, or diltiazem (DT) a calcium blocker. Three major guidelines, including the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA) indicate beta blockers and DT are equally acceptable medications for rate control in AF (3,4,5) assuming no contraindications. There are limited studies comparing beta blockers (BB) to DT for rate control for AF: Demircan, et. al., compared bolus intravenous BB and DT in 40 patients over a 20 minute period. No follow-up information after 20 minutes was reported. No attempt was made to look at intermediate or long term results. No patients converted to normal sinus rhythm over this short treatment period and there was slightly more rate decrease at 20 minutes, with DT versus BB (6). Time from medication administration to heart rate and rhythm control. Additionally, currently guidelines consider BB or DT medications to slow AF/FL; however, there are some suggestions that BB may not only slow heart rate in AF/FL (as does DT) but also increase all AF/FL conversion from AF/FL to normal sinus rhythm(2), and aid in maintaining normal sinus rhythm (NSR) after cardioversion (10). With recent onset AF/FL occurring within 48 hours prior to the arrival to the ED, approximately 50% of AF/FL patients convert to normal rhythm spontaneously within 24 hours after arrival to the ED (6), making evaluation of current limited studies difficult. Thus, the investigators wish to examine the effect of initial medication strategy on time to NSR in a larger sample than has been previously performed. A randomized study of 48 patients in China reported significantly slower heart rate up to 20 minutes with DT 10mg IV versus metoprolol 5mg IV but not after 30 minutes (7). A retrospective study of post-operative coronary bypass patients showed the intravenous administration of the BB, esmolol, to be more effective than DT for rate control and conversion of AF/FL (8). Hassan et al reported no difference in conversion to regular rhythm with esmolol verses DT in a small, under powered, randomized study of fifty ED patients (9). Conversion to sinus rhythm occurred in 10 patients (42%) in the DT group compared with 10 patients (39%) in the esmolol group (P = 1.0). There were no statistically significant differences in heart rate between the two medications at 1, 6, 12, and 24 hours after initiation of esmolol or DT infusion. Examples of such well quoted strategy trials are the COURAGE trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine and the PROMISE Trial, a worldwide multi-centered study that is nearing completion goal of 10,000 patients of which, Charleston Area Medical Center (CAMC) has enrolled approximately 100 patients. In this trial, patients being evaluated for chest pain will be randomized to two treatment strategies and subsequent outcomes will be recorded. Strategy trials do not attempt to manage treatment after an initial management strategy has been determined by randomization, but, whether the initial treatment affects long-term outcomes. This will be a prospective, randomized study comparing the outcomes of a strategy using either MET or DT in patients with AF presenting to the Charleston Area Medical Center (CAMC) ED. After presentation and receiving consent, the patient will be randomized to receive either MET or DT.

The aim of this randomized study was to assess the effectiveness of endomyocardial botulinum toxin injection for preventing post-procedural atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing the radiofrequency ablation of atrial flutter.