PURPOSE: Data indicate that the second-generation cryoballoon (Arctic Front Advance, Medtronic, Minnesota, USA) could be effective for persistent atrial fibrillation. However, electrophysiological findings and the midterm clinical outcome of repeat procedures following second-generation cryoballoon ablation are lacking. METHODS: Consecutive patients with drug-resistant persistent atrial fibrillation who underwent a repeat ablation due to arrhythmia recurrence following an index procedure with second-generation cryoballoon were retrospectively included in our analysis. A total of 24 patients were included. Twenty underwent repeat procedures because of atrial fibrillation or left atrial arrhythmias and four because of typical atrial flutter. Mean time to recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias was 6.6 ± 3 months. Mean redo procedural time was 122 ± 23 min. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 11.8 ± 6.5 months, 15 patients (75 %) did not experience recurrence of atrial arrhythmias. Of the five patients (25 %) who had recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia, four presented with persistent atrial fibrillation and one with a mitral isthmus-dependent flutter. Of note is that the four patients with typical flutter were free from atrial tachycardia recurrence after the redo procedure. Two patients (9 %) underwent a third procedure. Mean time to recurrence of atrial arrhythmias from the repeat procedure was 9 ± 1 months. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that repeat ablation procedures following a second-generation cryoballoon ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation result in 75 % of freedom from any atrial tachycardia at 12 months follow-up. Of the recurrences, 63 % were due to new onset of atrial fibrillation and 37 % to organized tachycardias.
PURPOSE: Data indicate that the second-generation cryoballoon (Arctic Front Advance, Medtronic, Minnesota, USA) could be effective for persistent atrial fibrillation. However, electrophysiological findings and the midterm clinical outcome of repeat procedures following second-generation cryoballoon ablation are lacking. METHODS: Consecutive patients with drug-resistant persistent atrial fibrillation who underwent a repeat ablation due to arrhythmia recurrence following an index procedure with second-generation cryoballoon were retrospectively included in our analysis. A total of 24 patients were included. Twenty underwent repeat procedures because of atrial fibrillation or left atrial arrhythmias and four because of typical atrial flutter. Mean time to recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias was 6.6 ± 3 months. Mean redo procedural time was 122 ± 23 min. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 11.8 ± 6.5 months, 15 patients (75 %) did not experience recurrence of atrial arrhythmias. Of the five patients (25 %) who had recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia, four presented with persistent atrial fibrillation and one with a mitral isthmus-dependent flutter. Of note is that the four patients with typical flutter were free from atrial tachycardia recurrence after the redo procedure. Two patients (9 %) underwent a third procedure. Mean time to recurrence of atrial arrhythmias from the repeat procedure was 9 ± 1 months. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that repeat ablation procedures following a second-generation cryoballoon ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation result in 75 % of freedom from any atrial tachycardia at 12 months follow-up. Of the recurrences, 63 % were due to new onset of atrial fibrillation and 37 % to organized tachycardias.
Authors: Craig T January; L Samuel Wann; Joseph S Alpert; Hugh Calkins; Joaquin E Cigarroa; Joseph C Cleveland; Jamie B Conti; Patrick T Ellinor; Michael D Ezekowitz; Michael E Field; Katherine T Murray; Ralph L Sacco; William G Stevenson; Patrick J Tchou; Cynthia M Tracy; Clyde W Yancy Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Giacomo Mugnai; Carlo de Asmundis; Burak Hünük; Erwin Ströker; Vedran Velagic; Darragh Moran; Diego Ruggiero; Ebru Hacioglu; Jan Poelaert; Christian Verborgh; Vincent Umbrain; Stefan Beckers; Hugo Enrique Coutino-Moreno; Ken Takarada; Pedro Brugada; Gian-Battista Chierchia Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2015-12-24 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Mark D O'Neill; Pierre Jaïs; Yoshihide Takahashi; Anders Jönsson; Frédéric Sacher; Mélèze Hocini; Prashanthan Sanders; Thomas Rostock; Martin Rotter; Andrej Pernat; Jacques Clémenty; Michel Haïssaguerre Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2006-11-14 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Sanjiv M Narayan; David E Krummen; Paul Clopton; Kalyanam Shivkumar; John M Miller Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Evgeny N Mikhaylov; Dmitry S Lebedev; Evgeny A Pokushalov; Karapet V Davtyan; Eduard A Ivanitskii; Anatoly A Nechepurenko; Alexey Ya Kosonogov; Grigory V Kolunin; Igor A Morozov; Sergey A Termosesov; Evgeny B Maykov; Dmitry N Khomutinin; Sergey A Eremin; Igor M Mayorov; Alexander B Romanov; Vitaliy V Shabanov; Victoria Shatakhtsyan; Viktor Tsivkovskii; Amiran Sh Revishvili; Evgeny V Shlyakhto Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-11-12 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Jayson R Baman; Rachel M Kaplan; Celso L Diaz; Graham Peigh; Aakash A Bavishi; Amar Trivedi; Jeremiah Wasserlauf; Alexandru B Chicos; Rishi Arora; Susan Kim; Albert Lin; Nishant Verma; Bradley P Knight; Rod S Passman Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2019-05-17 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Graham Peigh; Jeremiah Wasserlauf; Rachel M Kaplan; Ansel P Amaral; Amar Trivedi; Alexandru B Chicos; Rishi Arora; Susan Kim; Albert Lin; Nishant Verma; Bradley P Knight; Rod S Passman Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2020-03-09 Impact factor: 2.942