Arash Aryana1, Sheldon M Singh2, Marcin Kowalski3, Deep K Pujara4, Andrew I Cohen5, Steve K Singh4, Ryan G Aleong6, Rajesh S Banker7, Charles E Fuenzalida5, Nelson A Prager5, Mark R Bowers1, André D'Avila8, Padraig Gearoid O'Neill1. 1. Regional Cardiology Associates and Dignity Health Heart & Vascular Institute, Sacramento, California, USA. 2. Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. Division of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, New York, USA. 4. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, CHI Baylor St. Luke's Medical Center, Texas Heart Institute, Houston, Texas, USA. 5. Aurora Denver Cardiology Associates, Aurora, Colorado, USA. 6. Division of Cardiac Electrophysiology, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado, USA. 7. Hoag Hospital, Newport Beach, CA and University of California Irvine Medical Center, Orange, California, USA. 8. Instituto de Pesquisa em Arritmia Cardiaca (IPAC), Hospital Cardiologico-Florianopolis, Florianopolis, South Carolina, Brazil.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There are limited comparative data on catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (CAAF) using the second-generation cryoballoon (CB-2) versus point-by-point radiofrequency (RF). This study examines the acute/long-term CAAF outcomes using these 2 strategies. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this multicenter, retrospective, nonrandomized analysis, procedural and clinical outcomes of 1,196 patients (76% with paroxysmal AF) undergoing CAAF using CB-2 (n = 773) and open-irrigated, non-force sensing RF (n = 423) were evaluated. Pulmonary vein isolation was achieved in 98% with CB-2 and 99% with RF (P = 0.168). CB-2 was associated with shorter ablation time (40 ± 14 min vs. 66 ± 26 min; P < 0.001) and procedure time (145 ± 49 minutes vs. 188 ± 42 minutes; P < 0.001), but greater fluoroscopic utilization (29 ± 13 minutes vs. 23 ± 14 minutes; P < 0.001). While transient (7.6% vs. 0%; P < 0.001) and persistent (1.2% vs. 0%; P = 0.026) phrenic nerve palsy occurred exclusively with CB-2, other adverse event rates were similar between CB-2 (1.6%) and RF (2.6%); P = 0.207. However, freedom from AF/atrial flutter/tachycardia at 12 months following a single procedure without antiarrhythmic therapy was greater with CB-2 (76.6%) versus RF (60.4%); P < 0.001. While this difference was evident in patients with paroxysmal AF (P < 0.001), it did not reach significance in those with persistent AF (P = 0.089). Additionally, CB-2 was associated with reduced long-term need for antiarrhythmic therapy (16.7% vs. 22.0%; P = 0.024) and repeat ablations (14.6% vs. 24.1%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this multicenter, retrospective, nonrandomized study, CAAF using CB-2 coupled with RF as occasionally required was associated with greater freedom from atrial arrhythmias at 12 months following a single procedure without antiarrhythmic therapy when compared to open-irrigated, non-force sensing RF, alone.
INTRODUCTION: There are limited comparative data on catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (CAAF) using the second-generation cryoballoon (CB-2) versus point-by-point radiofrequency (RF). This study examines the acute/long-term CAAF outcomes using these 2 strategies. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this multicenter, retrospective, nonrandomized analysis, procedural and clinical outcomes of 1,196 patients (76% with paroxysmal AF) undergoing CAAF using CB-2 (n = 773) and open-irrigated, non-force sensing RF (n = 423) were evaluated. Pulmonary vein isolation was achieved in 98% with CB-2 and 99% with RF (P = 0.168). CB-2 was associated with shorter ablation time (40 ± 14 min vs. 66 ± 26 min; P < 0.001) and procedure time (145 ± 49 minutes vs. 188 ± 42 minutes; P < 0.001), but greater fluoroscopic utilization (29 ± 13 minutes vs. 23 ± 14 minutes; P < 0.001). While transient (7.6% vs. 0%; P < 0.001) and persistent (1.2% vs. 0%; P = 0.026) phrenic nerve palsy occurred exclusively with CB-2, other adverse event rates were similar between CB-2 (1.6%) and RF (2.6%); P = 0.207. However, freedom from AF/atrial flutter/tachycardia at 12 months following a single procedure without antiarrhythmic therapy was greater with CB-2 (76.6%) versus RF (60.4%); P < 0.001. While this difference was evident in patients with paroxysmal AF (P < 0.001), it did not reach significance in those with persistent AF (P = 0.089). Additionally, CB-2 was associated with reduced long-term need for antiarrhythmic therapy (16.7% vs. 22.0%; P = 0.024) and repeat ablations (14.6% vs. 24.1%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this multicenter, retrospective, nonrandomized study, CAAF using CB-2 coupled with RF as occasionally required was associated with greater freedom from atrial arrhythmias at 12 months following a single procedure without antiarrhythmic therapy when compared to open-irrigated, non-force sensing RF, alone.
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: 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; José 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: Heart Rhythm Date: 2012-03-01 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Valter Giaretto; Andrea Ballatore; Claudio Passerone; Paolo Desalvo; Mario Matta; Andrea Saglietto; Mario De Salve; Fiorenzo Gaita; Bruno Panella; Matteo Anselmino Journal: J R Soc Interface Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 4.118
Authors: Arash Aryana; Sheldon M Singh; Giacomo Mugnai; Carlo de Asmundis; Marcin Kowalski; Deep K Pujara; Andrew I Cohen; Steve K Singh; Charles E Fuenzalida; Nelson Prager; Mark R Bowers; Padraig Gearoid O'Neill; Pedro Brugada; André d'Avila; Gian-Battista Chierchia Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2016-07-30 Impact factor: 1.900