Search

Aims: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), the standard for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, is most commonly applied with radiofrequency (RF) energy, although cryoballoon technology (CRYO) has gained widespread use. The aim was to compare the second-generation cryoballoon and the irrigated RF energy regarding outcomes and safety., Methods and Results: Of 4657 patients undergoing their first AF ablation, 982 with CRYO and 3675 with RF energy were included from the Swedish catheter ablation registry and the Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term registry of the European Heart Rhythm Association of the European Society of Cardiology. The primary endpoint was repeat AF ablation. The major secondary endpoints included procedural duration, tachyarrhythmia recurrence, and complication rate. The re-ablation rate after 12 months was significantly lower in the CRYO vs. the RF group, 7.8% vs. 11%, P = 0.005, while freedom from arrhythmia recurrence (30 s duration) did not differ between the groups, 70.2 % vs. 68.2%, P = 0.44. The result was not influenced by AF type and lesion sets applied. In the Cox regression analysis, paroxysmal AF had significantly lower risk for re-ablation with CRYO, hazard ratio 0.56 (P = 0.041). Procedural duration was significantly shorter with CRYO than RF, (mean ± SD) 133.6 ± 45.2 min vs. 174.6 ± 58.2 min, P < 0.001. Complication rates were similar; 53/982 (5.4%) vs. 191/3675 (5.2%), CRYO vs. RF, P = 0.806., Conclusion: The lower re-ablation rates and shorter procedure times observed with the cryoballoon as compared to RF ablation may have important clinical implications when choosing AF ablation technique despite recognized limitations with registries., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2018. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: A single cryoballoon (CB) application per vein for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) could save time and was therefore compared to the standard approach of two consecutive CB applications for acute and long-term efficacy and safety., Methods and Results: Patients with symptomatic AF were randomized to a single CB application per vein guided by an Achieve® catheter (Single cryo-arm) or to two CB applications using a standard guidewire (Routine cryo-arm). The primary endpoint was the rate of acute complete PVI. Secondary endpoints were freedom from AF evaluated by electrocardiogram and 7 days Holter at 6 and 12 months, symptoms by Symptom Severity Questionnaires and EHRA score and quality of life (QoL) by EQ5D-5L at 12 months. Among 140 patients included, PVI was achieved in 271 (100%) veins in the Single cryo-arm and in 269/271 (99.3%) veins in the Routine cryo-arm, P = 0.25. The procedure time was shorter in the Single cryo-arm, mean ± standard deviation 99.4 ± 33.3 min vs. 118.4 ± 34.3 min, P = 0.0015. Freedom from AF after one procedure at 12 months did not differ; 73.9.0% (Single cryo) vs. 71.4% (Routine), P = 0.74. Symptoms and QoL did also not differ between the two groups. There was a lower complication rate in the Single cryo-group, 2.9% vs. 12.9%, P = 0.03., Conclusion: A single CB application shortens the procedure time without affecting acute or long-term efficacy, as compared to the routine two-application strategy, which with the lower complication rates has important implications when defining standards for PVI.