BACKGROUND: Cryoballoon ablation has emerged as a novel treatment strategy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using cryoballoon ablation versus RF ablation with regard to myocardial injury, pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection patterns, and outcome. METHODS: Fifty patients (age 59 ± 9 years, ejection fraction 0.59 ± 0.06, left atrial size 41 ± 5 mm) with paroxysmal AF were studied. Twenty-five patients underwent PVI using a 28-mm cryoballoon. A control group of 25 patients underwent PVI using an open-irrigation RF ablation catheter. Myocardial injury was determined by measuring troponin T (TnT). PV reconnection patterns were studied in case of repeat procedures. RESULTS: Procedure duration was 166 ± 32 minutes in the cryoballoon group versus 197 ± 52 minutes in the RF group (P = .014), with similar ablation times (cryoballoon: 45 minutes [interquartile range 40-52.5 minutes]; RF: 47 minutes [interquartile range 44-65 minutes], P = .17). Postprocedural TnT in the RF group was 1.29 ± 0.41 μg/L versus 0.76 ± 0.55 μg/L in the cryoballoon group (P = .002). In 12 patients who underwent repeat ablation, 74% of PV reconnection sites were inferiorly located in the cryoballoon group compared to 17% in the RF group (P = .0004). With 1.2 ± 0.4 and 1.3 ± 0.6 procedures per patient, 88% of patients in the cryoballoon group and 92% in the RF group were in stable sinus rhythm after follow-up of 12 ± 3 months (P = NS). CONCLUSION: Differences in the extent of myocardial injury and patterns of PV reconnection were observed between cryoballoon ablation and RF ablation of paroxysmal AF.
BACKGROUND: Cryoballoon ablation has emerged as a novel treatment strategy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using cryoballoon ablation versus RF ablation with regard to myocardial injury, pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection patterns, and outcome. METHODS: Fifty patients (age 59 ± 9 years, ejection fraction 0.59 ± 0.06, left atrial size 41 ± 5 mm) with paroxysmal AF were studied. Twenty-five patients underwent PVI using a 28-mm cryoballoon. A control group of 25 patients underwent PVI using an open-irrigation RF ablation catheter. Myocardial injury was determined by measuring troponin T (TnT). PV reconnection patterns were studied in case of repeat procedures. RESULTS: Procedure duration was 166 ± 32 minutes in the cryoballoon group versus 197 ± 52 minutes in the RF group (P = .014), with similar ablation times (cryoballoon: 45 minutes [interquartile range 40-52.5 minutes]; RF: 47 minutes [interquartile range 44-65 minutes], P = .17). Postprocedural TnT in the RF group was 1.29 ± 0.41 μg/L versus 0.76 ± 0.55 μg/L in the cryoballoon group (P = .002). In 12 patients who underwent repeat ablation, 74% of PV reconnection sites were inferiorly located in the cryoballoon group compared to 17% in the RF group (P = .0004). With 1.2 ± 0.4 and 1.3 ± 0.6 procedures per patient, 88% of patients in the cryoballoon group and 92% in the RF group were in stable sinus rhythm after follow-up of 12 ± 3 months (P = NS). CONCLUSION: Differences in the extent of myocardial injury and patterns of PV reconnection were observed between cryoballoon ablation and RF ablation of paroxysmal AF.
Authors: Bor Antolič; Andrej Pernat; Marta Cvijić; David Žižek; Matevž Jan; Matjaž Šinkovec Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2016-06-06 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Hugh Calkins; Karl Heinz Kuck; Riccardo Cappato; Josep Brugada; A John Camm; Shih-Ann Chen; Harry J G Crijns; Ralph J Damiano; D Wyn Davies; John DiMarco; James Edgerton; Kenneth Ellenbogen; Michael D Ezekowitz; David E Haines; Michel Haissaguerre; Gerhard Hindricks; Yoshito Iesaka; Warren Jackman; Jose Jalife; Pierre Jais; Jonathan Kalman; David Keane; Young-Hoon Kim; Paulus Kirchhof; George Klein; Hans Kottkamp; Koichiro Kumagai; Bruce D Lindsay; Moussa Mansour; Francis E Marchlinski; Patrick M McCarthy; J Lluis Mont; Fred Morady; Koonlawee Nademanee; Hiroshi Nakagawa; Andrea Natale; Stanley Nattel; Douglas L Packer; Carlo Pappone; Eric Prystowsky; Antonio Raviele; Vivek Reddy; Jeremy N Ruskin; Richard J Shemin; Hsuan-Ming Tsao; David Wilber Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 1.900
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: Ioanna Kosmidou; Shannnon Wooden; Brian Jones; Thomas Deering; Andrew Wickliffe; Dan Dan Journal: J Vis Exp Date: 2013-02-26 Impact factor: 1.355
Authors: Tobias Reichlin; Stephen J Lockwood; Michael J Conrad; Eyal Nof; Gregory F Michaud; Roy M John; Laurence M Epstein; William G Stevenson; Petr Jarolim Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2016-03-12 Impact factor: 1.900