AIMS: To assess safety, feasibility and short term outcome of pulmonary vein (PV) isolation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) with a cryoballoon. METHODS: We consecutively treated 57 patients with a double lumen 23 or 28 mm cryoballoon. The acute results, complications and follow-up over the first three months were analysed, using a comprehensive and intensive follow-up period. RESULTS: During 57 procedures, 185 of 220 targeted PV's were successfully isolated using the cryoballoon (84%) (balloon group, 33 patients). In 33 veins (15%) an additional segmental isolation (hybrid group, 24 patients) was necessary with a standard cryocatheter to achieve isolation. The average procedure times were respectively 211 +/- 108 and 261 +/- 83 minutes (NS), the average fluoroscopy times 52 +/- 36 and 66 +/- 33 minutes (NS). The number of balloon applications did not differ between both groups: respectively a median 9 (4-18) and 10 (5-17) (NS). We observed four phrenic nerve paralysis after ablation of the right superior PV: two resolved immediately after cessation of the cryoenergy, one recovered after 3 months, one persisted up to 6 months. A daily transtelephonic rhythm recording showed a significant drop in mean AF burden from 24% to 10%, 8% and 5% during the three consecutive months of follow-up (p < 0.01 versus baseline). No differences were observed between the treatment groups. 34 patients (60%) were completely free from AF after a single procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Balloon cryoablation of the pulmonary veins with additional segmental isolation if necessary, is a good approach for patients presenting with paroxysmal AF, showing a significant reduction in AF burden after a single procedure. The major complication seems to be phrenic nerve paralysis after ablation of the right superior PV, but this is potentially reversible over several months.
AIMS: To assess safety, feasibility and short term outcome of pulmonary vein (PV) isolation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) with a cryoballoon. METHODS: We consecutively treated 57 patients with a double lumen 23 or 28 mm cryoballoon. The acute results, complications and follow-up over the first three months were analysed, using a comprehensive and intensive follow-up period. RESULTS: During 57 procedures, 185 of 220 targeted PV's were successfully isolated using the cryoballoon (84%) (balloon group, 33 patients). In 33 veins (15%) an additional segmental isolation (hybrid group, 24 patients) was necessary with a standard cryocatheter to achieve isolation. The average procedure times were respectively 211 +/- 108 and 261 +/- 83 minutes (NS), the average fluoroscopy times 52 +/- 36 and 66 +/- 33 minutes (NS). The number of balloon applications did not differ between both groups: respectively a median 9 (4-18) and 10 (5-17) (NS). We observed four phrenic nerve paralysis after ablation of the right superior PV: two resolved immediately after cessation of the cryoenergy, one recovered after 3 months, one persisted up to 6 months. A daily transtelephonic rhythm recording showed a significant drop in mean AF burden from 24% to 10%, 8% and 5% during the three consecutive months of follow-up (p < 0.01 versus baseline). No differences were observed between the treatment groups. 34 patients (60%) were completely free from AF after a single procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Balloon cryoablation of the pulmonary veins with additional segmental isolation if necessary, is a good approach for patients presenting with paroxysmal AF, showing a significant reduction in AF burden after a single procedure. The major complication seems to be phrenic nerve paralysis after ablation of the right superior PV, but this is potentially reversible over several months.
Authors: Hugh Calkins; Gerhard Hindricks; Riccardo Cappato; Young-Hoon Kim; Eduardo B Saad; Luis Aguinaga; Joseph G Akar; Vinay Badhwar; Josep Brugada; John Camm; Peng-Sheng Chen; Shih-Ann Chen; Mina K Chung; Jens Cosedis Nielsen; Anne B Curtis; D Wyn Davies; John D Day; André d'Avila; N M S Natasja de Groot; Luigi Di Biase; Mattias Duytschaever; James R Edgerton; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; Patrick T Ellinor; Sabine Ernst; Guilherme Fenelon; Edward P Gerstenfeld; David E Haines; Michel Haissaguerre; Robert H Helm; Elaine Hylek; Warren M Jackman; Jose Jalife; Jonathan M Kalman; Josef Kautzner; Hans Kottkamp; Karl Heinz Kuck; Koichiro Kumagai; Richard Lee; Thorsten Lewalter; Bruce D Lindsay; Laurent Macle; Moussa Mansour; Francis E Marchlinski; Gregory F Michaud; Hiroshi Nakagawa; Andrea Natale; Stanley Nattel; Ken Okumura; Douglas Packer; Evgeny Pokushalov; Matthew R Reynolds; Prashanthan Sanders; Mauricio Scanavacca; Richard Schilling; Claudio Tondo; Hsuan-Ming Tsao; Atul Verma; David J Wilber; Teiichi Yamane Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2017-05-12 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Michael Kühne; Sven Knecht; David Altmann; Nadine Kawel; Peter Ammann; Beat Schaer; Stefan Osswald; Christian Sticherling Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2012-10-23 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: K R Julian Chun; Alexander Fürnkranz; Boris Schmidt; Andreas Metzner; Roland Tilz; Thomas Zerm; Ilka Köster; Buelent Koektuerk; Melanie Konstantinidou; Feifan Ouyang; Karl Heinz Kuck Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2009-06-10 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Pipin Kojodjojo; Mark D O'Neill; Phang Boon Lim; Louisa Malcolm-Lawes; Zachary I Whinnett; Tushar V Salukhe; Nicholas W Linton; David Lefroy; Anthony Mason; Ian Wright; Nicholas S Peters; Prapa Kanagaratnam; D Wyn Davies Journal: Heart Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Gian Battista Chierchia; Lucio Capulzini; Carlo de Asmundis; Andrea Sarkozy; Antonio Sorgente; Yoshinao Yazaki; Stephan-Andreas Muller-Burri; Gaetano Paparella; Marc Lameir; Fatih Bayrak; Roberto De Ponti; Pedro Brugada Journal: Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J Date: 2010-09-05