Atrial Fibrillation (AF)APAF-CSPNCT07604727
AV Nodal Ablation With Conduction System Pacing Versus Cardiac Resynchronization for Symptomatic Heart Failure Patients With Atrial Fibrillation
A study testing Conduction System Pacing and Cardiac resynchronization therapy in people with Atrial Fibrillation (AF) and Heart Failure, run by University Medical Center Groningen at 23 sites in 4 countries.
Trial summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if conduction system pacing works as well as cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) post atrioventricular (AV) node ablation in adult patients with symptomatic heart failure and atrial fibrillation that is not suitable for rhythm control. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Atrial Fibrillation (AF), Heart Failure, Cardiac Pacing
- What is being tested?
- Conduction System Pacing and Cardiac resynchronization therapy
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 292 participants
- Where
- 23 sitesin 4 countries
- Study dates
- Jul 2026to Jun 2030
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age 18 years or above.
- Patient is diagnosed with AF and deemed not amenable to rhythm control. This diagnosis of AF will be demonstrated by at least one Electrocardiograph (ECG) showing AF that was performed within one year prior to enrollment.
- Has history of stable heart failure (regardless left ventricular ejection fraction) and has a history of at least one HF related hospitalization or emergency room/urgent care visit within 2 years prior to enrollment, despite being on maximally tolerable guideline directed medical therapy.
- Willing and capable to provide informed consent.
Who cannot join
- NYHA functional class IV.
- Severe concomitant non-cardiac disease.
- Patient who require any cardiac surgical intervention.
- Previously implanted pacing devices (pacemaker/ICD/CRT) with ≥40% pacing burden.
- Any of the following within the 3 months prior to enrollment:
- Myocardial infarction
Show all 13Show fewer
- Unstable angina
- Percutaneous coronary intervention
- Stroke or TIA
- Significant bleeding
- Pericarditis/effusions
- Coronary artery bypass surgery/atriotomy within 6 months prior to enrolment.
- Women who are pregnant or breastfeeding.
Trial locations and contacts
23 sites in 4 countries. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Ahmed S Yassin, MD contact
23 sites in 4 countries
Italy8 sites
Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi
Florence
Paolo Pieragnoli, MD, pieragnolip@aou-careggi.toscana.it
Department of Cardiology, Ospedali del Tigullio
Lavagna
Paolo Donateo, MD, Paolo.donateo@gmail.com
Department of Cardiology, IRCCS Instituto Auxologico Italiano, Ospedale San Luca
Milan
Michele Brignole, MD, Professor, mbrignole@outlook.it
Ospedale San Raffaele
Milan
Bisceglia Caterina, MD, bisceglia.caterina@hsr.it
Ospedale Santa Maria della Pieta
Nola
Mario Volpicelli, MD, epvolpicelli@gmail.com
Department of Cardiology, Ospedale S. Maria Nuova
Reggio Emilia
Matteo Iori, MD, Matteo.Iori@ausl.re.it
Ospedale San Pietro Fatebenefratelli
Roma
Daniele Porcelli, MD, daniele.porcelli@hotmail.it
Department of Cardiology, Ospedale Panico
Tricase
Pietro Palmisano, MD, dr.palmisano@libero.it
France5 sites
CHU de Grenoble
Grenoble
Pascal Defaye, MD, PDefaye@chu-grenoble.fr
CHU la Timone
Marseille
Jean-claude Deharo, MD, jean-claude.deharo@ap-hm.fr
Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou
Paris
Eloi Marijon, MD, eloi.marijon@aphp.fr
CHU de Rouen
Rouen
Frederic Anselme, MD, frederic.anselme@chu-rouen.fr
Clinique Pasteur Toulouse
Toulouse
Serge Boveda, MD, sboveda@clinique-pasteur.com
Germany5 sites
Marienhospital Gelsenkirchen
Gelsenkirchen
Axel Kloppe, MD, +49 209 1723601, kardiologie@marienhospital.eu
University Medical Center Mainz
Mainz
Peter Seidel, MD, +49 1791957811, peseidel@uni-mainz.de
Klinikum rechts der Isar
München
Eimo Martens, MD, +49 1714124861, eimo.martens@mri.tum.de
St. Vincenz-Krankenhaus GmbH
Paderborn
Andreas Goette, MD, +49 5251861651, Andreas.Goette@vincenz.de
Klinik für Kardiologie und Intensivmedizin
Stade
Peter Lüdike, MD, +49 5413264662, peter.luedike@niels-stensen-kliniken.de
Netherlands5 sites
Jeroen Bosch Ziekenhuis
's-Hertogenbosch
Wouter Wieringa, MD, w.wieringa@jbz.nl
University Medical Center Groningen
Groningen, Provincie Groningen
Michiel Rienstra, MD, PhD, MHA, Professor, +31503611327, m.rienstra@umcg.nl
Yuri Blaauw, MD, PhD
FrisiusMC
Leeuwarden
Marnix Van Bemmel, MD, marnixvanbemmel@outlook.com
Maastricht UMC
Maastricht
Twan Van Stipdonk, MD, twan.van.stipdonk@mumc.nl
Antonius Hospital
Nieuwegein
Vincent Van Dijk, MD, v.van.dijk@antoniusziekenhuis.nl
About this study
Official title: AV Nodal Ablation With Conduction System Pacing Versus Cardiac Resynchronization for Symptomatic Heart Failure Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: The APAF-CSP All-cause Mortality and Quality of Life Trial
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if conduction system pacing works as well as cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) post atrioventricular (AV) node ablation in adult patients with symptomatic heart failure and atrial fibrillation that is not suitable for rhythm control.
The main question it aims to answer is:
Read more
Is AV node ablation with conduction system pacing noninferior to AV node ablation with CRT for the hierarchical composite outcome of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization or urgent heart failure visit, and meaningful improvement in heart failure-related quality of life?
Participants will undergo:
- An AV node ablation and be randomly assigned to receive either a conduction system pacing or a CRT.
- Attend follow-up visits (in clinic or by telephone) at baseline, intervention day, 3-month, 12-month, 24-month, and 36-month after the procedure.
- Complete questionnaires about heart failure symptoms and quality of life at baseline, 12 months, and yearly.
- Have an echocardiogram, an electrocardiogram, and blood tests at baseline and 1 year
- At selected centers: they will be asked to wear a bracelet that measures arterial stiffness for 30 minutes and provide a urine sample at baseline and 1 year.
Read the detailed description
- Study Rationale:
Therapeutic options for patients with symptomatic HF and AF that is not suitable for rhythm control are limited to pharmacological rate control and/or AV node ablation plus CRT implantation (Class IIa, Level of Evidence B). CSP is gaining more and more attention, and it has the advantage of utilizing the native conduction system to activate both ventricles simultaneously. This would achieve more physiologically synchronized ventricular contraction and circulation dynamics. We hypothesize that conduction system pacing would be as efficient as CRT pacing in patients with symptomatic heart failure and AF that is not suitable for rhythm control who are receiving the "ablate and pace" treatment strategy.
+Objective:
- Primary Objective: To compare AV node ablation with conduction system pacing versus AV node ablation with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) among the trial population with respect to the hierarchical composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, HF hospitalization or unplanned/urgent HF visit, and ≥5 point improvement (increase) in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) score.
- Secondary Objectives: To determine the effect of AV node ablation with conduction system pacing compared to AV node ablation with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) among the trial population in the following outcomes: -≥5 point improvement (increase) in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) score.
- Quality of life measures (EQ-5D and AFEQT questionnaires). -HF hospitalization or unplanned/urgent HF visit. -Cardiovascular related hospitalization. -All-cause mortality. -Cardiovascular related mortality. Tertiary (Exploratory) Objectives: To determine the effect of AV node ablation with conduction system pacing compared to AV node ablation with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) among the trial population in the following outcomes:
- Duration of hospitalization for cardiovascular causes
- Worsening heart failure (NYHA class at baseline,1 year and at end of follow-up),
- Healthcare costs and cost-effectiveness,
- Trends of NT-proBNP levels at baseline and follow up
- Change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at baseline and 1 year
- Change in renal function metrics (Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR), Creatinine (Cr) and blood Urea levels (BUN)) at baseline and 1 year.
- Change in urine Microalbumin (by urine dipstick) at baseline and 1 year (only in the subgroup analysis).
- Change in measured arterial stiffness index measured by the photoplethysmography (PPG) signals through a non-invasive blood-volume sensing wearable bracelet, at baseline and 1 year (only in the subgroup analysis).
- Short-term safety outcomes: This includes the composite of short-term (i.e. within 3 months) post procedure related complications (i.e. Cardiac tamponade, Pneumothorax, postoperative wound infection, Pocket hematomas, lead dislodgment, vascular injury, Thromboembolism, and Pericarditis).
- Long term safety outcomes: This includes the composite of long-term (i.e. within 3 years) post procedure related complications (Device and Lead integrity related complications (i.e. lead dislodgment, lead malfunction, generator malfunction, lead related infections)).
- Study design: The APAF-CSP trial is a prospective, multicenter, international, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority, parallel-arms trial. Patients who have atrial fibrillation (AF), that is not suitable for rhythm control, and a history of at least one hospitalization or unplanned/urgent care visit due to heart failure within the last 2 years, regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction or QRS duration, will be invited to participate. The trial will take place in 23 participating hospitals in Europe (Netherlands, Germany, Italy and France). +Study population: Adult patients aged 18 years or older, with confirmed AF that is unsuitable for rhythm control and symptomatic HF (with a history of at least one hospitalization or unplanned/urgent care visit due to HF exacerbation within the 2 years before enrolment), regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction or QRS duration, will be invited to participate in this trial. Based on sample size estimations, the trial needs 292 patients with a median follow-up of 2.5 years. +Intervention: All patients meeting the inclusion criteria and not meeting any exclusion criteria will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either AV node ablation with CSP or AV node ablation with CRT implantation. Throughout the trial, patients will be followed up at predefined intervals for endpoint data collection. +Main study endpoint: The hierarchical primary composite endpoint is the composite of all-cause mortality, HF hospitalization or unplanned/urgent HF visit, and ≥5 point improvement (increase) in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). +Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: AV node catheter ablation and pacemaker implantation, whether CRT or CSP, are well-established and safe techniques. They are well-known for their efficiency for rate control in the appropriate population. The follow-up assessments will be conducted either physically (i.e. patient visits) and/or (when possible) remotely (i.e. telephone encounter) to minimize patient effort. Additional study procedures, such as transthoracic echocardiography and blood sample collection, will be performed at baseline during the screening assessment and during the 1-year follow-up visit. These procedures are part of usual clinical care for these patients undergoing AV nodal ablation with pacemaker implantation. Consequently, the additional effort and time to fill out a few "Quality-of-Life" questionnaires are determined to be the main extra burden that consumes time for both the patient and the treating physician. However, this increased burden is non-invasive and will be highlighted in the consent/participation form. In pre-selected centers (subgroup analyses), a urine sample for the microalbumin check will be collected at baseline and the 1-year visit. Furthermore, the vascular stiffness index (VSI) will be measured by a wearable bracelet. This VSI measurement will be performed at the baseline visit and at the 1-year follow up visit, where the participant will be asked to wear the device for 30 minutes (during the visit). The VSI recording and urine microalbumin check are painless, non-invasive and fully funded by the study. The patient will not be required to come for an extra visit to the study site for the sole reason of this recording or for the urine sample, and instead, this is incorporated into the scheduled study visits. However, the increased burden of providing a urine sample and wearing the bracelet during the visit is fully acknowledged and will be highlighted in the consent/participation forms.
- Conditions
- Atrial Fibrillation (AF), Heart Failure, Cardiac Pacing
- Being tested
- Conduction System Pacing, Cardiac resynchronization therapy
- Keywords
- Conduction System Pacing, Cardiac Resynchronization, Atrial Fibrillation, AV Nodal Ablation, Heart Failure, All-cause Mortality, Quality of Life, HF hospitalization, Unplanned/urgent HF visit, Arterial Stiffness Index, Photoplethysmography, APAF-CSP, EQ-5D, AFEQT, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ)
- Medical subject headings
- Atrial Fibrillation, Heart Failure
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Conduction System PacingProcedure or surgery
The implantation of a pacing device with a pacing lead that aims to capture and pace the native conduction system.
Cardiac resynchronization therapyProcedure or surgery
The implantation of a pacing device with a pacing leads that aims to capture and pace both ventricles in a synchronized fashion, to achieve the best possible hemodynamic parameters and synchrony.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| CSP Group (Intervention Group) | Other | AV node ablation plus Conduction System Pacing implantation. CSP is established pacing strategy evaluated in comparison with CRT. Receives: Procedure: Conduction System Pacing |
| CRT Group (Control Group) | Active comparator | AV node ablation plus cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation. CRT is established standard pacing strategy. Receives: Procedure: Cardiac resynchronization therapy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The hierarchical composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, HF hospitalization or unplanned/urgent HF visit, and ≥5 point improvement (increase) in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) score.
The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) scores are scaled 0-100 (the higher score indicates a better condition).
Measured: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
Secondary outcomes (7)
Major secondary endpoint: ≥5 point improvement (increase) in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) score.
The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) scores are scaled 0-100 (the higher score indicates a better condition).
Measured: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
Quality of Life Improvement (AFEQT Questionnaire)
The AFEQT is a disease-specific questionnaire that focuses on assessing the impact of AF on a person's QoL. It covers several domains, including symptoms, daily activities, treatment concerns, and treatment satisfaction. The AFEQT provides scores for each domain as well as a total score, allowing for a comprehensive evaluation of the specific aspects affected by AF on an individual's QoL. Scale 0-100, higher scores indicate no limitation or disability.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
Quality of Life Improvement (EQ-5D-5L Questionnaire)
The EQ-5D-5L is a questionnaire used to assess health-related QoL across five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has five response levels indicating the level of problems experienced by the individual ( 1= no problems, 2= slight problems, 3= moderate problems, 4= severe problems, and 5= extreme problems). The EQ-5D-5L also generates a summary index score that represents overall health status based on societal preferences for different health states.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
HF Hospitalization or Unplanned/urgent HF Visit
Measured: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
Cardiovascular Related Hospitalization
Measured: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
All-cause Mortality
Measured: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
Cardiovascular Related Mortality
Measured: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 May 2026
- Study startJul 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completionJun 2030 (estimated)
- Study completionJun 2030 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (82)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Atrial Fibrillation (AF)Studies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- The APAF-CSP trial is a prospective, multicenter, international, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority, parallel-arms trial
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 292 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University Medical Center Groningen
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, M. Rienstra, University Medical Center Groningen
- Investigators
- Michiel Rienstra, MD, PhD, MHA, Professor, Study chair, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The NetherlandsYuri Blaauw, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, University Medical Center Groningen
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07604727
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NL-011147
- Acronym
- APAF-CSP
- Status last verified
- May 2026
- First submitted
- 12 May 2026
- Last updated
- 22 May 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes
Publications
Spertus J, Dorian P, Bubien R, Lewis S, Godejohn D, Reynolds MR, Lakkireddy DR, Wimmer AP, Bhandari A, Burk C. Development and validation of the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-Life (AFEQT) Questionnaire in patients with atrial fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2011 Feb;4(1):15-25. doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.110.958033. Epub 2010 Dec 15.
PubMed 21160035Spertus JA, Jones PG, Sandhu AT, Arnold SV. Interpreting the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire in Clinical Trials and Clinical Care: JACC State-of-the-Art Review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Nov 17;76(20):2379-2390. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.09.542.
PubMed 33183512Chatterjee S, Sardar P, Lichstein E, Mukherjee D, Aikat S. Pharmacologic rate versus rhythm-control strategies in atrial fibrillation: an updated comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2013 Jan;36(1):122-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2012.03513.x. Epub 2012 Sep 14.
PubMed 22978656Wood MA, Brown-Mahoney C, Kay GN, Ellenbogen KA. Clinical outcomes after ablation and pacing therapy for atrial fibrillation : a meta-analysis. Circulation. 2000 Mar 14;101(10):1138-44. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.101.10.1138.
PubMed 10715260Weerasooriya R, Davis M, Powell A, Szili-Torok T, Shah C, Whalley D, Kanagaratnam L, Heddle W, Leitch J, Perks A, Ferguson L, Bulsara M. The Australian Intervention Randomized Control of Rate in Atrial Fibrillation Trial (AIRCRAFT). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003 May 21;41(10):1697-702. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(03)00338-3.
PubMed 12767649Ueng KC, Tsai TP, Tsai CF, Wu DJ, Lin CS, Lee SH, Chen SA. Acute and long-term effects of atrioventricular junction ablation and VVIR pacemaker in symptomatic patients with chronic lone atrial fibrillation and normal ventricular response. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2001 Mar;12(3):303-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1540-8167.2001.00303.x.
PubMed 11291803Brignole M, Menozzi C, Gianfranchi L, Musso G, Mureddu R, Bottoni N, Lolli G. Assessment of atrioventricular junction ablation and VVIR pacemaker versus pharmacological treatment in patients with heart failure and chronic atrial fibrillation: a randomized, controlled study. Circulation. 1998 Sep 8;98(10):953-60. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.98.10.953.
PubMed 9737514Brignole M, Gianfranchi L, Menozzi C, Alboni P, Musso G, Bongiorni MG, Gasparini M, Raviele A, Lolli G, Paparella N, Acquarone S. Assessment of atrioventricular junction ablation and DDDR mode-switching pacemaker versus pharmacological treatment in patients with severely symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a randomized controlled study. Circulation. 1997 Oct 21;96(8):2617-24. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.96.8.2617.
PubMed 9355902Brignole M, Gianfranchi L, Menozzi C, Bottoni N, Bollini R, Lolli G, Oddone D, Gaggioli G. Influence of atrioventricular junction radiofrequency ablation in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation and flutter on quality of life and cardiac performance. Am J Cardiol. 1994 Aug 1;74(3):242-6. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(94)90364-6.
PubMed 8037128Yeung-Lai-Wah JA, Qi A, Uzun O, Humphries K, Kerr CR. Long-term survival following radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrioventricular junction for atrial fibrillation: clinical and ablation determinants of mortality. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2002 Feb;6(1):17-23. doi: 10.1023/a:1014168021615.
PubMed 11839879Eckardt L, Doldi F, Anwar O, Gessler N, Scherschel K, Kahle AK, von Falkenhausen AS, Thaler R, Wolfes J, Metzner A, Meyer C, Willems S, Kobe J, Lange PS, Frommeyer G, Kuck KH, Kaab S, Steinbeck G, Sinner MF. Major in-hospital complications after catheter ablation of cardiac arrhythmias: individual case analysis of 43 031 procedures. Europace. 2023 Dec 28;26(1):euad361. doi: 10.1093/europace/euad361.
PubMed 38102318Sharma PS, Patel NR, Ravi V, Zalavadia DV, Dommaraju S, Garg V, Larsen TR, Naperkowski AM, Wasserlauf J, Krishnan K, Young W, Pokharel P, Oren JW, Storm RH, Trohman RG, Huang HD, Subzposh FA, Vijayaraman P. Clinical outcomes of left bundle branch area pacing compared to right ventricular pacing: Results from the Geisinger-Rush Conduction System Pacing Registry. Heart Rhythm. 2022 Jan;19(1):3-11. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2021.08.033. Epub 2021 Sep 3.
PubMed 34481985Vijayaraman P, Ponnusamy S, Cano O, Sharma PS, Naperkowski A, Subsposh FA, Moskal P, Bednarek A, Dal Forno AR, Young W, Nanda S, Beer D, Herweg B, Jastrzebski M. Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: Results From the International LBBAP Collaborative Study Group. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2021 Feb;7(2):135-147. doi: 10.1016/j.jacep.2020.08.015. Epub 2020 Oct 28.
PubMed 33602393Ponnusamy SS, Vijayaraman P. Late dislodgement of left bundle branch pacing lead and successful extraction. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021 Aug;32(8):2346-2349. doi: 10.1111/jce.15155. Epub 2021 Jul 16.
PubMed 34245478De Pooter J, Calle S, Timmermans F, Van Heuverswyn F. Left bundle branch area pacing using stylet-driven pacing leads with a new delivery sheath: A comparison with lumen-less leads. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021 Feb;32(2):439-448. doi: 10.1111/jce.14851. Epub 2021 Jan 4.
PubMed 33355969
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 22 May 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- AV Nodal Ablation With Conduction System Pacing Versus Cardiac Resynchronization for Symptomatic Heart Failure Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: The APAF-CSP All-cause Mortality and Quality of Life Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07604727
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- APAF-CSP / NL-011147
- Conditions
- Atrial Fibrillation (AF), Heart Failure, Cardiac Pacing
- Keywords
- Conduction System Pacing, Cardiac Resynchronization, Atrial Fibrillation, AV Nodal Ablation, Heart Failure, All-cause Mortality, Quality of Life, HF hospitalization
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 292 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University Medical Center GroningenUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jul 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- Jun 2030 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Jun 2030 (estimated)
- First posted
- 22 May 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if conduction system pacing works as well as cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) post atrioventricular (AV) node ablation in adult patients with symptomatic heart failure and atrial fibrillation that is not suitable for rhythm control.
The main question it aims to answer is:
Is AV node ablation with conduction system pacing noninferior to AV node ablation with CRT for the hierarchical composite outcome of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization or urgent heart failure visit, and meaningful improvement in heart failure-related quality of life?
Participants will undergo:
- An AV node ablation and be randomly assigned to receive either a conduction system pacing or a CRT.
- Attend follow-up visits (in clinic or by telephone) at baseline, intervention day, 3-month, 12-month, 24-month, and 36-month after the procedure.
- Complete questionnaires about heart failure symptoms and quality of life at baseline, 12 months, and yearly.
- Have an echocardiogram, an electrocardiogram, and blood tests at baseline and 1 year
- At selected centers: they will be asked to wear a bracelet that measures arterial stiffness for 30 minutes and provide a urine sample at baseline and 1 year.
Detailed description
- Study Rationale:
Therapeutic options for patients with symptomatic HF and AF that is not suitable for rhythm control are limited to pharmacological rate control and/or AV node ablation plus CRT implantation (Class IIa, Level of Evidence B). CSP is gaining more and more attention, and it has the advantage of utilizing the native conduction system to activate both ventricles simultaneously. This would achieve more physiologically synchronized ventricular contraction and circulation dynamics. We hypothesize that conduction system pacing would be as efficient as CRT pacing in patients with symptomatic heart failure and AF that is not suitable for rhythm control who are receiving the "ablate and pace" treatment strategy.
+Objective:
- Primary Objective: To compare AV node ablation with conduction system pacing versus AV node ablation with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) among the trial population with respect to the hierarchical composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, HF hospitalization or unplanned/urgent HF visit, and ≥5 point improvement (increase) in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) score.
- Secondary Objectives: To determine the effect of AV node ablation with conduction system pacing compared to AV node ablation with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) among the trial population in the following outcomes: -≥5 point improvement (increase) in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) score.
- Quality of life measures (EQ-5D and AFEQT questionnaires). -HF hospitalization or unplanned/urgent HF visit. -Cardiovascular related hospitalization. -All-cause mortality. -Cardiovascular related mortality. Tertiary (Exploratory) Objectives: To determine the effect of AV node ablation with conduction system pacing compared to AV node ablation with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) among the trial population in the following outcomes:
- Duration of hospitalization for cardiovascular causes
- Worsening heart failure (NYHA class at baseline,1 year and at end of follow-up),
- Healthcare costs and cost-effectiveness,
- Trends of NT-proBNP levels at baseline and follow up
- Change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at baseline and 1 year
- Change in renal function metrics (Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR), Creatinine (Cr) and blood Urea levels (BUN)) at baseline and 1 year.
- Change in urine Microalbumin (by urine dipstick) at baseline and 1 year (only in the subgroup analysis).
- Change in measured arterial stiffness index measured by the photoplethysmography (PPG) signals through a non-invasive blood-volume sensing wearable bracelet, at baseline and 1 year (only in the subgroup analysis).
- Short-term safety outcomes: This includes the composite of short-term (i.e. within 3 months) post procedure related complications (i.e. Cardiac tamponade, Pneumothorax, postoperative wound infection, Pocket hematomas, lead dislodgment, vascular injury, Thromboembolism, and Pericarditis).
- Long term safety outcomes: This includes the composite of long-term (i.e. within 3 years) post procedure related complications (Device and Lead integrity related complications (i.e. lead dislodgment, lead malfunction, generator malfunction, lead related infections)).
- Study design: The APAF-CSP trial is a prospective, multicenter, international, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority, parallel-arms trial. Patients who have atrial fibrillation (AF), that is not suitable for rhythm control, and a history of at least one hospitalization or unplanned/urgent care visit due to heart failure within the last 2 years, regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction or QRS duration, will be invited to participate. The trial will take place in 23 participating hospitals in Europe (Netherlands, Germany, Italy and France). +Study population: Adult patients aged 18 years or older, with confirmed AF that is unsuitable for rhythm control and symptomatic HF (with a history of at least one hospitalization or unplanned/urgent care visit due to HF exacerbation within the 2 years before enrolment), regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction or QRS duration, will be invited to participate in this trial. Based on sample size estimations, the trial needs 292 patients with a median follow-up of 2.5 years. +Intervention: All patients meeting the inclusion criteria and not meeting any exclusion criteria will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either AV node ablation with CSP or AV node ablation with CRT implantation. Throughout the trial, patients will be followed up at predefined intervals for endpoint data collection. +Main study endpoint: The hierarchical primary composite endpoint is the composite of all-cause mortality, HF hospitalization or unplanned/urgent HF visit, and ≥5 point improvement (increase) in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). +Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: AV node catheter ablation and pacemaker implantation, whether CRT or CSP, are well-established and safe techniques. They are well-known for their efficiency for rate control in the appropriate population. The follow-up assessments will be conducted either physically (i.e. patient visits) and/or (when possible) remotely (i.e. telephone encounter) to minimize patient effort. Additional study procedures, such as transthoracic echocardiography and blood sample collection, will be performed at baseline during the screening assessment and during the 1-year follow-up visit. These procedures are part of usual clinical care for these patients undergoing AV nodal ablation with pacemaker implantation. Consequently, the additional effort and time to fill out a few "Quality-of-Life" questionnaires are determined to be the main extra burden that consumes time for both the patient and the treating physician. However, this increased burden is non-invasive and will be highlighted in the consent/participation form. In pre-selected centers (subgroup analyses), a urine sample for the microalbumin check will be collected at baseline and the 1-year visit. Furthermore, the vascular stiffness index (VSI) will be measured by a wearable bracelet. This VSI measurement will be performed at the baseline visit and at the 1-year follow up visit, where the participant will be asked to wear the device for 30 minutes (during the visit). The VSI recording and urine microalbumin check are painless, non-invasive and fully funded by the study. The patient will not be required to come for an extra visit to the study site for the sole reason of this recording or for the urine sample, and instead, this is incorporated into the scheduled study visits. However, the increased burden of providing a urine sample and wearing the bracelet during the visit is fully acknowledged and will be highlighted in the consent/participation forms.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- The APAF-CSP trial is a prospective, multicenter, international, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority, parallel-arms trial
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| CSP Group (Intervention Group) | Other | Procedure: Conduction System PacingAV node ablation plus Conduction System Pacing implantation. CSP is established pacing strategy evaluated in comparison with CRT. |
| CRT Group (Control Group) | Active comparator | Procedure: Cardiac resynchronization therapyAV node ablation plus cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation. CRT is established standard pacing strategy. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Age 18 years or above.
- Patient is diagnosed with AF and deemed not amenable to rhythm control. This diagnosis of AF will be demonstrated by at least one Electrocardiograph (ECG) showing AF that was performed within one year prior to enrollment.
- Has history of stable heart failure (regardless left ventricular ejection fraction) and has a history of at least one HF related hospitalization or emergency room/urgent care visit within 2 years prior to enrollment, despite being on maximally tolerable guideline directed medical therapy.
- Willing and capable to provide informed consent.
Key exclusion criteria (13 listed)
- NYHA functional class IV.
- Severe concomitant non-cardiac disease.
- Patient who require any cardiac surgical intervention.
- Previously implanted pacing devices (pacemaker/ICD/CRT) with ≥40% pacing burden.
- Any of the following within the 3 months prior to enrollment:
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Conduction System PacingThe implantation of a pacing device with a pacing lead that aims to capture and pace the native conduction system. | Procedure or surgery | CSP Group (Intervention Group) |
| Cardiac resynchronization therapyThe implantation of a pacing device with a pacing leads that aims to capture and pace both ventricles in a synchronized fashion, to achieve the best possible hemodynamic parameters and synchrony. | Procedure or surgery | CRT Group (Control Group) |
Primary outcome
The hierarchical composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, HF hospitalization or unplanned/urgent HF visit, and ≥5 point improvement (increase) in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) score.
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) scores are scaled 0-100 (the higher score indicates a better condition).
7 secondary outcomes
Major secondary endpoint: ≥5 point improvement (increase) in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) score.
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
Quality of Life Improvement (AFEQT Questionnaire)
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
Quality of Life Improvement (EQ-5D-5L Questionnaire)
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
HF Hospitalization or Unplanned/urgent HF Visit
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
Cardiovascular Related Hospitalization
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
All-cause Mortality
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
Cardiovascular Related Mortality
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 22 May 2026.
- Background: PubMed 21160035Spertus J, Dorian P, Bubien R, Lewis S, Godejohn D, Reynolds MR, Lakkireddy DR, Wimmer AP, Bhandari A, Burk C. Development and validation of the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-Life (AFEQT) Questionnaire in patients with atrial fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2011 Feb;4(1):15-25. doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.110.958033. Epub 2010 Dec 15.
- Background: PubMed 33183512Spertus JA, Jones PG, Sandhu AT, Arnold SV. Interpreting the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire in Clinical Trials and Clinical Care: JACC State-of-the-Art Review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Nov 17;76(20):2379-2390. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.09.542.
- Background: PubMed 22978656Chatterjee S, Sardar P, Lichstein E, Mukherjee D, Aikat S. Pharmacologic rate versus rhythm-control strategies in atrial fibrillation: an updated comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2013 Jan;36(1):122-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2012.03513.x. Epub 2012 Sep 14.
- Background: PubMed 10715260Wood MA, Brown-Mahoney C, Kay GN, Ellenbogen KA. Clinical outcomes after ablation and pacing therapy for atrial fibrillation : a meta-analysis. Circulation. 2000 Mar 14;101(10):1138-44. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.101.10.1138.
- Background: PubMed 12767649Weerasooriya R, Davis M, Powell A, Szili-Torok T, Shah C, Whalley D, Kanagaratnam L, Heddle W, Leitch J, Perks A, Ferguson L, Bulsara M. The Australian Intervention Randomized Control of Rate in Atrial Fibrillation Trial (AIRCRAFT). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003 May 21;41(10):1697-702. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(03)00338-3.
- Background: PubMed 11291803Ueng KC, Tsai TP, Tsai CF, Wu DJ, Lin CS, Lee SH, Chen SA. Acute and long-term effects of atrioventricular junction ablation and VVIR pacemaker in symptomatic patients with chronic lone atrial fibrillation and normal ventricular response. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2001 Mar;12(3):303-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1540-8167.2001.00303.x.
- Background: PubMed 9737514Brignole M, Menozzi C, Gianfranchi L, Musso G, Mureddu R, Bottoni N, Lolli G. Assessment of atrioventricular junction ablation and VVIR pacemaker versus pharmacological treatment in patients with heart failure and chronic atrial fibrillation: a randomized, controlled study. Circulation. 1998 Sep 8;98(10):953-60. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.98.10.953.
- Background: PubMed 9355902Brignole M, Gianfranchi L, Menozzi C, Alboni P, Musso G, Bongiorni MG, Gasparini M, Raviele A, Lolli G, Paparella N, Acquarone S. Assessment of atrioventricular junction ablation and DDDR mode-switching pacemaker versus pharmacological treatment in patients with severely symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a randomized controlled study. Circulation. 1997 Oct 21;96(8):2617-24. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.96.8.2617.
- Background: PubMed 8037128Brignole M, Gianfranchi L, Menozzi C, Bottoni N, Bollini R, Lolli G, Oddone D, Gaggioli G. Influence of atrioventricular junction radiofrequency ablation in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation and flutter on quality of life and cardiac performance. Am J Cardiol. 1994 Aug 1;74(3):242-6. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(94)90364-6.
- Background: PubMed 11839879Yeung-Lai-Wah JA, Qi A, Uzun O, Humphries K, Kerr CR. Long-term survival following radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrioventricular junction for atrial fibrillation: clinical and ablation determinants of mortality. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2002 Feb;6(1):17-23. doi: 10.1023/a:1014168021615.
- Background: PubMed 38102318Eckardt L, Doldi F, Anwar O, Gessler N, Scherschel K, Kahle AK, von Falkenhausen AS, Thaler R, Wolfes J, Metzner A, Meyer C, Willems S, Kobe J, Lange PS, Frommeyer G, Kuck KH, Kaab S, Steinbeck G, Sinner MF. Major in-hospital complications after catheter ablation of cardiac arrhythmias: individual case analysis of 43 031 procedures. Europace. 2023 Dec 28;26(1):euad361. doi: 10.1093/europace/euad361.
- Background: PubMed 34481985Sharma PS, Patel NR, Ravi V, Zalavadia DV, Dommaraju S, Garg V, Larsen TR, Naperkowski AM, Wasserlauf J, Krishnan K, Young W, Pokharel P, Oren JW, Storm RH, Trohman RG, Huang HD, Subzposh FA, Vijayaraman P. Clinical outcomes of left bundle branch area pacing compared to right ventricular pacing: Results from the Geisinger-Rush Conduction System Pacing Registry. Heart Rhythm. 2022 Jan;19(1):3-11. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2021.08.033. Epub 2021 Sep 3.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes
Related trials for Atrial Fibrillation (AF)
Active, not recruiting
VOLT CE Mark Study
Atrial Arrhythmia, Atrial Fibrillation
RecruitingObservational study
AI-Based Cardiac Analysis Using 12-Lead and 1-Lead ECG
Heart Failure, Atrial Fibrillation (AF)
Not yet recruiting
CATCH AF - Atrial Fibrillation Detection in Cryptogenic Stroke
Atrial Fibrillation (AF)
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
A Comparison of Beta-blockers and Calcium Channel Blockers in Atrial Fibrillation
Atrial Fibrillation (AF)
Not yet recruiting
Dual-Energy Lattice-Tip Assisted Marshall-Plan Strategy in Redo Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Ablation
Atrial Fibrillation (AF)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Ahmed S Yassin, MD contact
Michiel Rienstra, MD, PhD, MHA, Professor study chair
University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
Yuri Blaauw, MD, PhD principal investigator
University Medical Center Groningen
23 sites in 4 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Conduction System Pacing and Cardiac resynchronization therapy in people with Atrial Fibrillation (AF) and Heart Failure, run by University Medical Center Groningen at 23 sites in 4 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 13 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 22 May 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 23 sites in Italy, France, Germany, Netherlands. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Michiel Rienstra, MD, PhD, MHA, Professor (+31503611327, m.rienstra@umcg.nl), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
The hierarchical composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, HF hospitalization or unplanned/urgent HF visit, and ≥5 point improvement (increase) in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) score. (time frame: From enrollment to the end of follow up (median follow-up of 2.5 years)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07604727, which also lists 82 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 22 May 2026.