BACKGROUND: Cryoablation has emerged as an alternative to radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) for the treatment of atrioventricular (AV) nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT). The purpose of this prospective randomized study was to test whether cryoablation is as effective as RFCA during both short-term and long-term follow-up with a lower risk of permanent AV block. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 509 patients underwentslow pathway cryoablation (n=251) or RFCA (n=258). The primary end point was immediate ablation failure, permanent AV block, and AVNRT recurrence during a 6-month follow-up. Secondary end points included procedural parameters, device functionality, and pain perception. Significantly more patients in the cryoablation group than the RFCA group reached the primary end point (12.6% versus 6.3%; P=0.018). Whereas immediate ablation success (96.8% versus 98.4%) and occurrence of permanent AV block (0% versus 0.4%) did not differ, AVNRT recurrence was significantly more frequent in the cryoablation group (9.4% versus 4.4%; P=0.029). In the cryoablation group, procedure duration was longer (138±54 versus 123±48 minutes; P=0.0012) and more device problems occurred (13 versus 2 patients; P=0.033). Pain perception was lower in the cryoablation group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cryoablation for AVNRT is as effective as RFCA over the short term but is associated with a higher recurrence rate at the 6-month follow-up. The risk of permanent AV block does not differ significantly between cryoablation and RFCA. The potential benefits of cryoenergy relative to ablation safety and pain perception are counterbalanced by longer procedure times, more device problems, and a high recurrence rate. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00196222.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Cryoablation has emerged as an alternative to radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) for the treatment of atrioventricular (AV) nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT). The purpose of this prospective randomized study was to test whether cryoablation is as effective as RFCA during both short-term and long-term follow-up with a lower risk of permanent AV block. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 509 patients underwent slow pathway cryoablation (n=251) or RFCA (n=258). The primary end point was immediate ablation failure, permanent AV block, and AVNRT recurrence during a 6-month follow-up. Secondary end points included procedural parameters, device functionality, and pain perception. Significantly more patients in the cryoablation group than the RFCA group reached the primary end point (12.6% versus 6.3%; P=0.018). Whereas immediate ablation success (96.8% versus 98.4%) and occurrence of permanent AV block (0% versus 0.4%) did not differ, AVNRT recurrence was significantly more frequent in the cryoablation group (9.4% versus 4.4%; P=0.029). In the cryoablation group, procedure duration was longer (138±54 versus 123±48 minutes; P=0.0012) and more device problems occurred (13 versus 2 patients; P=0.033). Pain perception was lower in the cryoablation group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cryoablation for AVNRT is as effective as RFCA over the short term but is associated with a higher recurrence rate at the 6-month follow-up. The risk of permanent AV block does not differ significantly between cryoablation and RFCA. The potential benefits of cryoenergy relative to ablation safety and pain perception are counterbalanced by longer procedure times, more device problems, and a high recurrence rate. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00196222.
Authors: Edmond M Cronin; Frank M Bogun; Philippe Maury; Petr Peichl; Minglong Chen; Narayanan Namboodiri; Luis Aguinaga; Luiz Roberto Leite; Sana M Al-Khatib; Elad Anter; Antonio Berruezo; David J Callans; Mina K Chung; Phillip Cuculich; Andre d'Avila; Barbara J Deal; Paolo Della Bella; Thomas Deneke; Timm-Michael Dickfeld; Claudio Hadid; Haris M Haqqani; G Neal Kay; Rakesh Latchamsetty; Francis Marchlinski; John M Miller; Akihiko Nogami; Akash R Patel; Rajeev Kumar Pathak; Luis C Saenz Morales; Pasquale Santangeli; John L Sapp; Andrea Sarkozy; Kyoko Soejima; William G Stevenson; Usha B Tedrow; Wendy S Tzou; Niraj Varma; Katja Zeppenfeld Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Dirk G Dechering; Ruben Schleberger; Eva Greiser; Jannis Dickow; Julia Koebe; Gerrit Frommeyer; Stephan Willems; Lars Eckardt; Boris A Hoffmann; Kristina Wasmer Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2018-03-19 Impact factor: 1.900