Search

Purpose: Limited comparative data are available regarding catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) using second-generation cryoballoon (CB-2) vs. radiofrequency (RF) ablation in elderly patients (> 75 years old). The present study aimed to compare the costs and clinical outcomes in elderly patients using these two strategies., Methods: Elderly patients with symptomatic drug-refractory paroxysmal/short-lasting persistent AF were included in the study. Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) was performed in all patients., Results: A total of 324 elderly patients were included (RF,176; CB-2,148) from September 2016 to April 2019. The CB-2 was associated with shorter procedure time and left atrial dwell time (112.9 ± 11.1 vs. 135.1 ± 9.9 min, P < 0.001; 53.7 ± 8.9 vs. 65.1.9 ± 9.0 min, P < 0.001) but marked fluoroscopy utilization (22.1 ± 3.3 vs. 18.5 ± 3.6 min, P < 0.001). Complications occurred in 3.3% (CB-2) and 6.2% (RF) of patients with no significant different (p = 0.307). The length of stay after ablation was shorter, but the costs were higher in the CB-2 group (1.94 vs. 2.53 days, P < 0.001 and 91,132.6 ± 3723.5 vs. 81,149.4 ± 6824.1 CNY, P < 0.001) compared to the RF group. Additionally, the rate of early recurrence of atrial arrhythmia (ERAA) was lower in the CB-2 group (14.2 vs. 23.3%, P = 0.047), but the long-term success rate was similar between two groups., Conclusions: CB-2 is associated with shorter procedure time, left atrial dwell time, and length of stay after ablation, as well as lower ERAA, but its costs and fluoroscopy time are greater than the RF group. Moreover, the rate of complications and long-term success is similar between the two groups.

Cumulative reports comparing the efficacy and safety outcomes between uninterrupted NOACs and vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in AF ablation had been freshly published. This meta-analysis aimed at offering a more comprehensive evaluation between these two anticoagulants in uninterrupted strategy. We searched in PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library (inception to June 10, 2019) for eligible studies. Fixed-effects model was preferred in pooled analysis if I 2  < 50%. Publication bias was also evaluated. A total of 23 studies involving 12,725 individuals were analyzed in this literature. There were no difference between uninterrupted NOACs and VKA groups in incidence of Stroke/TIA (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.54-1.77, P = 0.93, I 2  = 0%), silent cerebral embolism (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.82-1.43, P = 0.56, I 2  = 0%), minor bleeding complication (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83-1.14, P = 0.73, I 2  = 0%), cardiac tamponade (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.63-1.42, P = 0.80, I 2  = 0%). Uninterrupted NOACs was associated with significantly lower major bleeding incidence (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.92, P = 0.01, I 2  = 0%), pericardial effusion (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56-1.00, P = 0.048, I 2  = 9%). In sub-analysis, no difference was found in all sub-analyses for Stroke/TIA while significant major bleeding risk reduction in uninterrupted NOACs was identified in the subgroup of CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score ≥ 2 and target activated clotting time (ACT) > 300 s. In conclusions, uninterrupted NOACs was more effective than uninterrupted VKA in reducing major bleeding and pericardial effusion risk without increasing thromboembolism risk, and the benefits of uninterrupted NOACs on major bleeding complication could be more pronounced if CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score ≥ 2 or target ACT > 300 s.

Background: The ThermoCool Smarttouch Surroundflow catheter (STSFc) is an advanced catheter, which integrating contact force sensing and surroundflow technology. However, comparative data between STSFc and contact force sensing catheter (Thermocool SmartTouch catheter [STc]) are limited., Hypothesis: We thought that STSFc might bring more clinical benefits. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the safety and efficiency between the STSFc and the STc for treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF)., Methods: The Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies comparing STSFc and STc., Results: Four trials involving 727 patients were included in the study. Pool-analyses demonstrated that, as compared STc ablation, STSFc ablation was more beneficial in terms of procedural times (standard mean difference [SMD]: -0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.37 to -0.07, P = .005) and irrigation fluid volume (SMD: -1.94; 95% CI, -2.65 to -1.22, P < .0001). There was no significant difference between STSFc and STc (risk ratio [RR]: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.21, P = .79) for free from AF. Evidence of complications were low and similar for both groups (RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.19-3.55, P = .80). Additionally, patients administered STSFc ablation tended to have shorter fluoroscopic times (SMD: -0.20; 95% CI, -0.63-0.23, P = .21)., Conclusions: STSFc ablation was associated with reducing procedural times and irrigation fluid volume. Further, STSFc ablation tended to shorten fluoroscopic times. Therefore, STSFc ablation would be a better choice for AF patients especially in patients with heart failure., (© 2019 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Clinical outcomes of catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) remain discouraging., Aim: This meta‑analysis aimed to compare cryoballoon ablation (CBA) with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for persistent AF., Methods: A systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was performed for studies comparing the outcomes between CBA and RFA. Seven trials including 934 patients were analyzed., Results: There were no differences between groups in terms of freedom from atrial arrhythmia (risk ratio [RR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.93-1.15; P = 0.52; I2 = 0%), procedural complications (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.52-1.59; P = 0.74; I2 = 0%), atrial fibrillation or atrial tachycardia relapse during the blanking period (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.50-1.06; P = 0.1; I2 = 9%), repeat ablation (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.45-1.21; P = 0.23; I2 = 62%), and vascular complications (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.42-2.27; P = 0.97; I2 = 0%). Cryoballoon ablation increased the incidence of conversion to sinus rhythm during ablation (RR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.01-2.83; P = 0.046; I2 = 0%) and phrenic nerve palsy (PNP; RR, 3.05; 95% CI, 0.95-9.8; P = 0.06; I2 = 0%), while RFA increased the risk of cardiac tamponade (RR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.06-1.25; P = 0.09; I2 = 0%). Subanalyses revealed a lower incidence of recurrent atrial arrhythmia and repeat ablation during CBA without touch‑up RFA in pulmonary vein isolation., Conclusions: CBA provides an alternative technique for persistent AF ablation. It might reduce the risk of repeat ablation and cardiac tamponade but increase the risk of PNP.

Background: Premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) originating from aortic sinus cusps is not infrequent and can be eliminated effectively by radiofrequency ablation with rare complications. However, after a review of the medical literature, and to our knowledge, this is the first case of successful idiopathic aortic sinus cusps-PVC-ablation using a 3-dimensional (3D) mapping system in an adult with dextrocardia., Methods: A 62-year-old male with dextrocardia and situs inversus underwent catheter ablation of frequent PVCs. The electrocardiograms (ECG) were recorded by placement of the electrodes in reversed positions. The PVCs exhibited left bundle branch block and inferior axis QRS morphology with transition at leads V2-V3. The activation mapping indicated the earliest site of ventricular activation between the left and right aortic sinus cusps, highlighting that catheter ablation was successful at this point., Results: The catheter ablation was successful between the left and right aortic sinus cusps, and the PVCs were not detected for the subsequent 30 min following the procedure as well as for the rest of the hospital stay., Conclusion: Combined with ECG electrodes in reversed positions and 3D electroanatomical mapping system, catheter ablation of PVCs originating from aortic sinus cusps in patients with dextrocardia can be safely and effectively performed.

Purpose: The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess and compare the safety and efficacy of radiofrequency (RF) and cryoballoon (CB) ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). RF and CB ablation are two frequently used methods for pulmonary vein isolation in PAF, but which is a better choice for PAF remains uncertain., Methods: A systematic review was conducted in Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. All trials comparing RF and CB ablation were screened and included if the inclusion criteria were met., Results: A total of 38 eligible studies, 9 prospective randomized or randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 29 non- RCTs were identified, adding up to 15,496 patients. Pool analyses indicated that CB ablation was more beneficial in terms of procedural time [standard mean difference = -0.58; 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.85 to -0.30], complications without phrenic nerve injury (PNI) [odds ratio (OR) = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67-0.93; I 2  = 16%], and recrudescence (OR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-0.97; I 2  = 63%) for PAF; however, the total complications of CB was higher than RF. The subgroup analysis found that, compared with non-contact force radiofrequency (non-CF-RF), both first-generation cryoballoon (CB1) and second-generation cryoballoon (CB2) ablation could reduce complications with PNI, procedural time, and recrudescence. However, the safety and efficacy of CB2 was similar to those of CF-RF., Conclusion: Available overall and subgroup data suggested that both CB1 and CB2 were more beneficial than RF ablation, and the main advantages were reflected in comparing them with non-CF-RF. However, CF-RF and CB2 showed similar clinical benefits.

Background: Previous studies suggested that cryoballoon ablation had clinical benefits comparable to those of radiofrequency ablation. However, recently, some new catheters have been invented, and no universal consensus exists on which ablation is the optimal choice. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess and compare the safety and efficacy of cryoballoon and radiofrequency ablation by synthesizing published trials., Methods and Results: A systematic literature review was conducted searching Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and so forth. All trials comparing cryoballoon and radiofrequency ablation were screened and included if inclusion criteria were met. A total of 40 eligible studies were identified, adding up to 11,395 patients. The follow-up period ranged from 3 months to 25 months. Overall analyses indicated that cryoballoon ablation could bring more benefit in procedural time (risk ratio [RR] = -0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.62 to -0.15), atrial fibrillation (AF) recrudescence (RR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.70-0.96), and major complications (RR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.58-0.95) for patients with AF. For the subgroups, the first-generation cryoballoon significantly reduced procedural time and major complications, but it increased ablation time. The patients referred for the second-generation cryoballoon (CBA) seemed to receive more clinical benefit (procedural time, fluoroscopic time, ablation time, AF recrudescence) and fewer complications. Finally, multiparty catheter (MTCA) was found to significantly reduce procedural and fluoroscopic times with a high rate of AF recrudescence., Conclusions: The present systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that cryoballoon ablation was associated with greater freedom from AF, shorter procedural time, and lower rate of major complications, compared with radiofrequency ablation. Especially, CBA was more advantageous. However, MTCA seems promising for radiofrequency ablation., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)