Transseptal vs Retrograde Aortic Ventricular Entry to Reduce Systemic Emboli
Transseptal vs Retrograde Aortic Ventricular Entry to Reduce Systemic Emboli
This study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized (1:1) controlled comparative
 effectiveness trial of a transseptal approach to left ventricular ablation compared to a
 retrograde aortic approach to prevent cerebral emboli and neurocognitive decline in adults
 with ventricular tachycardia (VT) and/or premature ventricular contractions (PVCs).
This study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized (1:1) controlled comparative
 effectiveness trial of a transseptal approach to left ventricular ablation compared to a
 retrograde aortic approach to prevent cerebral emboli and neurocognitive decline in adults
 with ventricular tachycardia (VT) and/or premature ventricular contractions (PVCs).
 Participants will be followed for 6 months post-study procedure. This study will be conducted
 at up to 12 clinical sites in the United States. A total of one-hundred and fifty (150)
 participants will be enrolled and randomized.
Inclusion Criteria:

 1. Men and women ≥ 18 years of age

 2. Planned/scheduled endocardial ventricular tachycardia (VT) or premature ventricular
 contraction (PVC) catheter ablation procedure

 3. For this patient, the current plan of the operator must be to pursue a catheter
 ablation target in the left ventricular endocardium that can be accessed by either a
 transseptal puncture or retrograde aortic approach

 4. Life expectancy of at least 1 year

 5. Willing and able to undergo pre- and post-ablation MRIs

 6. Willing and able to return and comply with scheduled follow up visits (through the 6
 month follow-up)

 7. Willing and able to provide written informed consent

 Exclusion Criteria:

 1. Planned epicardial ablation that would include a coronary angiogram (during the index
 ventricular tachycardia (VT) or premature ventricular contraction (PVC) catheter
 ablation procedure)

 2. Any contraindication to MRI (as defined by the institution performing the MRI)

 3. Clinical contraindication to a retrograde aortic approach as determined by the
 treating physician, including:

 1. Severe Aortic stenosis

 2. Mechanical aortic valve

 4. Clinical contraindication to a transseptal puncture as determined by the treating
 physician , including:

 1. Severe Mitral valve stenosis

 2. Mechanical Mitral valve

 3. ASD or PFO closure device that would preclude a transseptal puncture

 4. Mitraclip or Alfieri mitral valve repair that would preclude a transseptal
 puncture

 5. Planned or known need to perform either a retrograde aortic approach or transseptal
 approach (such as to target another site during the same procedure)

 6. Inability to speak, read, and write in the English language at a 6th grade level
 (required for the Neurocognitive Function Testing)

 7. Current mental impairment or other diagnosis which precludes accurate assessment of
 neurocognitive function or which may not allow patient to understand the nature,
 significance and scope of the study

 8. Inability to perform neurocognitive function testing after > 24 hours free of sedating
 medications