Clinical trials

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and represents one of the leading causes of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. According to current data, AF is associated with approximately 20% of all ischemic strokes, while the risk of stroke in patients with this arrhythmia is increased fivefold. Ischemic stroke in patients with AF is characterized by a more severe clinical course, more frequently results in death, is associated with significant disability, and carries a higher risk of recurrence compared with strokes of other etiologies. Consequently, the risk of death in patients with AF-associated stroke is doubled, while the economic costs of treatment increase by an average of 1.5 times. The aim of the present study is to perform a comparative evaluation of the efficacy of two interventional treatment strategies for atrial fibrillation: very high-power short-duration radiofrequency ablation (90 W) and conventional low-power radiofrequency ablation (35-45 W) for pulmonary vein isolation using the "CLOSE protocol" approach with a non-fluoroscopic navigation system. The efficacy of the interventions will be assessed both in the early postoperative period and during long-term follow-up over 12 months.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the cause of 20% of strokes, and the risk of stroke in a person suffering from this arrhythmia increases by 5 times. Ischemic stroke in patients with AF is often fatal and, compared with stroke of other etiology, leads to the most pronounced disability and more often recurs. Accordingly, the risk of death in patients with AF-related stroke is 2 times higher, and treatment costs increase 1.5 times. The main interventional method of treating AF, available in most medical institutions, is the use of radio frequency and/or cryoenergy to eliminate destructive damage to the left atrium (LA). The aim of this study is to compare two different interventional methods and identify predictors of recurrence in patients with persistent and long-term AF.