Catheter Ablation vs Conservative Care in Elderly Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Trial statusRecruiting
Trial phaseNot applicable
Trial typeInterventional
Biological sexAll
Age78+
SponsorKarolinska University Hospital

About this trial

ACE-AF is a multicenter randomized study in people aged 78 years and older with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). AF is a common heart rhythm disorder in older adults and can cause reduced quality of life and lead to serious complications such as stroke and heart failure.

The study compares two established treatment strategies:

1. Catheter ablation (an invasive procedure aimed at reducing AF by electrically isolating triggers in the heart, primarily through pulmonary vein isolation), and 2. Optimized medical therapy without AF ablation (medications for rate and/or rhythm control; AV node ablation with pacemaker may be used if clinically indicated according to routine care).

Participants are randomized 1:1 to one of these strategies. All participants will receive an implantable loop recorder (a small heart rhythm monitor placed under the skin) to continuously track heart rhythm and measure AF burden over time.

The study has two primary endpoints, tested with Holm-Bonferroni multiplicity control assessed over 24 months:

1. a composite of major clinical events (all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding, cardiac arrest, or hospitalization due to heart failure), and 2. patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL), measured by the RAND-36 "General Health" domain.

ACE-AF will provide evidence to guide treatment decisions for very elderly patients with symptomatic AF and help identify which patients benefit most from an ablation-based strategy compared with optimized medical therapy.

Eligibility criteria

This trial does not accept healthy volunteers

Qualifiers

Age ≥78 years.

ECG-documented atrial fibrillation.

AF type: paroxysmal, persistent, or longstanding persistent AF.

Suitable candidate for catheter ablation according to ESC guidelines.

Disqualifiers

Left atrial (LA) dimension >55 mm, based on echocardiography within the previous year.

Acute coronary syndrome or coronary artery bypass surgery within the last 12 weeks.

Severe valvular heart disease (per ESC definitions) or congenital heart disease.

Prior surgical or catheter AF ablation procedure, or prior AV-node (atrioventricular nodal) ablation.

Trial design

Design model

Parallel

Treatments tested in this trial

  • Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation

    Procedure/Surgery

    Catheter ablation for symptomatic atrial fibrillation with pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) prioritized as the primary lesion set. Energy source and tools are selected according to local practice and operator discretion (no restriction to a specific technology), performed under routine standards of care at experienced centres.

  • Optimized Medical Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation

    Drug

    Guideline-directed rate and/or rhythm control tailored to the participant's clinical condition, including rate-control medications and/or antiarrhythmic drugs and cardioversion when clinically appropriate. AF ablation is not performed as part of this strategy.

  • Implantable Loop Recorder (ILR)

    Device

    Subcutaneous implantable loop recorder used for continuous rhythm monitoring and quantification of atrial fibrillation burden throughout follow-up. Implanted in all participants according to protocol-defined workflow.

  • AV Node Ablation With Pacemaker implantation

    Procedure/Surgery

    AV node ablation with permanent pacing may be performed when clinically indicated according to routine care, as part of the optimized medical therapy strategy.

Treatment groups

282 Participants
are divided into 2 treatment groups
Group A: Catheter Ablation StrategyActive comparator 3 interventions
Group B: Optimized Medical Therapy (Rate/Rhythm control) ± AV Node Ablation + PacingActive comparator 2 interventions

Trial outcomes

Primary outcomes

1

Composite clinical endpoint (all-cause mortality, stroke, serious bleeding, cardiac arrest, or heart failure hospitalization)

First part of the co-primary outcome: Proportion of participants with ≥1 of the following events within 24 months after intervention (visit 2): all-cause death, stroke, serious bleeding, cardiac arrest, or hospitalization for heart failure. Events will be adjudicated per protocol.

Time frame
24 months after intervention (visit 2)
2

Change in RAND-36 General Health score

Second part of the co-primary outcome: Change from baseline in the RAND-36 "General Health" domain score at 24 months after the intervention (visit 2). Scores range 0-100; higher scores indicate better perceived health. Intention-to-treat. Because HRQoL is undefined after death, scores are not imputed for participants who die before the 24-month assessment; instead, deceased participants are assigned the worst rank (worst-rank / composite estimand, ICH E9(R1)) and the primary comparison uses a rank-based test. Missing data other than death are handled under a missing-at-random assumption with pre-specified sensitivity analyses.

Time frame
Baseline to 24 months after intervention (visit 2)

Secondary outcomes

1

Differences of atrial fibrillation and atrial tachycardia burden (ILR-derived) between groups

Differences in percentage of time in atrial fibrillation and atrial tachycardia ("AF/AT burden") measured by continuous monitoring using an implantable loop recorder (ILR) between randomization groups.

Time frame
From date of ILR implantation (intervention day, visit 2) up to 30 months after implantation.
2

Hospitalizations (all-cause and cardiovascular)

Number of hospital admissions, including cardiovascular/AF-related hospitalizations, collected from clinical records.

Time frame
Up to 24 months after intervention
3

Serious adverse events and treatment-related complications

Serious adverse events (SAEs) and procedure-/treatment-related complications, including ablation-related and device-related complications, recorded and classified per protocol.

Time frame
Up to 24 months after intervention
4

Additional patient-reported outcomes (AF symptoms / disease-specific HRQoL)

Symptom burden and AF-related quality of life assessed using validated questionnaires specified in the protocol (e.g., ASTA and/or AFEQT, as applicable).

Time frame
Baseline and follow-up (3, 12, 18) through 24 months after intervention

Other outcomes

1

Discrimination of an inflammation proteomics-based prediction model for the ACE-AF primary composite outcome

A predefined subgroup of patients included in the County of Stockholm and Östergotland will be analyzed using a targeted inflammation proteomics panel. A prespecified inflammation proteomics score will be computed from the panel. The score combined with baseline clinical covariates will be used to develop a prediction model for time to first occurrence of the ACE-AF primary composite outcome event.

Time frame
Up to 24 months after intervention (visit 2).
2

Correlation between change in Epicardial fat and the combined AF/AT burden

Correlation between CT-derived Epicardial fat volume around LA the combined AF/AT burden measured by ILR through follow-up.

Time frame
From implantation (visit 2) up to 24 months after the intervention
3

Discrimination of a saliva proteomics-based prediction model for the primary composite outcome

In a predefined subgroup providing separate consent, saliva samples will be analyzed using a proteomics platform. A prespecified salivary proteomics score will be used to develop a prediction model for the first occurrence of the study primary composite outcome event from baseline.

Time frame
Baseline through 24 months after intervention
4

Change from baseline in oral health-related quality of life (OHIP-14 total score)

Patient-reported oral health-related quality of life measured using the Swedish version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14). The outcome will be reported as change from baseline in OHIP-14 total score.

Time frame
Up to 12 months after baseline visit

Sponsors and contacts

Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.

Karolinska University Hospital

Lead sponsor

University Hospital, Linkoeping

Collaborator

Sahlgrenska University Hospital

Collaborator

University Hospital, Umeå

Collaborator

Dept of Cardiology, Örebro University Hospital, Sweden

Collaborator

Lund University Hospital

Collaborator

Onassis Cardiac Surgery Centre

Collaborator

Uppsala University Hospital

Collaborator

Royal Adelaide Hospital

Collaborator