AIMS: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) can be accomplished using radiofrequency (RF) or second generation cryoballoon (CB2). We aimed to compare the freedom from very late recurrence (VLR) defined as recurrence beyond one year in patients who were AF-free during the first post-procedural year after PVI using CB2 or RF. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent PVI by RF or CB2 ablation between August 2014 and December 2015 were included. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of VLR in follow-up after 12 months. Patients who experienced recurrence between the first 3 to 12 months after PVI and those who did not complete 15-month follow-up time were excluded. RESULTS: 139 patients were included: 68 underwent PVI by CB2 and 71 using RF. The global VLR rate was of 22.15%. The freedom from VLR beyond 12-month follow-up was of 84.5% (57 patients) for the CB2 group vs. 71% (50 patients) in the RF group (p=0.037). 15 patients underwent re-ablation (11 of the RF group and 4 of the CB2 group): all of the patients who had undergone PVI by RF in the index procedure were found to have vein reconnection, whereas none of the CB2 group had reconnected veins (3 cavotricuspid isthmus and 1 mitral isthmus). CONCLUSION: In patients free of recurrence during the first post-procedural year after pulmonary vein isolation for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: second generation cryoballoon ablation showed a significantly lower very late recurrence rate compared to radiofrequency ablation. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: The present study evaluates the freedom from very late recurrence (VLR), defined as recurrence in patients who were arrhythmia-free during the first post-procedural year after pulmonary vein isolation using second generation cryoballoon (CB2) or radiofrequency (RF). CB2 ablation had a lower VLR rate compared to RF.
AIMS: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) can be accomplished using radiofrequency (RF) or second generation cryoballoon (CB2). We aimed to compare the freedom from very late recurrence (VLR) defined as recurrence beyond one year in patients who were AF-free during the first post-procedural year after PVI using CB2 or RF. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent PVI by RF or CB2 ablation between August 2014 and December 2015 were included. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of VLR in follow-up after 12 months. Patients who experienced recurrence between the first 3 to 12 months after PVI and those who did not complete 15-month follow-up time were excluded. RESULTS: 139 patients were included: 68 underwent PVI by CB2 and 71 using RF. The global VLR rate was of 22.15%. The freedom from VLR beyond 12-month follow-up was of 84.5% (57 patients) for the CB2 group vs. 71% (50 patients) in the RF group (p=0.037). 15 patients underwent re-ablation (11 of the RF group and 4 of the CB2 group): all of the patients who had undergone PVI by RF in the index procedure were found to have vein reconnection, whereas none of the CB2 group had reconnected veins (3 cavotricuspid isthmus and 1 mitral isthmus). CONCLUSION: In patients free of recurrence during the first post-procedural year after pulmonary vein isolation for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: second generation cryoballoon ablation showed a significantly lower very late recurrence rate compared to radiofrequency ablation. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: The present study evaluates the freedom from very late recurrence (VLR), defined as recurrence in patients who were arrhythmia-free during the first post-procedural year after pulmonary vein isolation using second generation cryoballoon (CB2) or radiofrequency (RF). CB2 ablation had a lower VLR rate compared to RF.
Authors: Hakan Oral; Carlo Pappone; Aman Chugh; Eric Good; Frank Bogun; Frank Pelosi; Eric R Bates; Michael H Lehmann; Gabriele Vicedomini; Giuseppe Augello; Eustachio Agricola; Simone Sala; Vincenzo Santinelli; Fred Morady Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-03-02 Impact factor: 91.245
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: Sumeet K Mainigi; William H Sauer; Joshua M Cooper; Sanjay Dixit; Edward P Gerstenfeld; David J Callans; Andrea M Russo; Ralph J Verdino; David Lin; Erica S Zado; Francis E Marchlinski Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2006-11-01
Authors: Emanuele Bertaglia; Claudio Tondo; Antonio De Simone; Franco Zoppo; Massimo Mantica; Pietro Turco; Assunta Iuliano; Giovanni Forleo; Vincenzo La Rocca; Giuseppe Stabile Journal: Europace Date: 2009-11-03 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Uğur Canpolat; Kudret Aytemir; Hikmet Yorgun; Levent Şahiner; Ergün Barış Kaya; Ali Oto Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2013-09-07 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Maciej Wójcik; Alexander Berkowitsch; Harald Greiss; Sergey Zaltsberg; Dimitri Pajitnev; Nicolas Deubner; Christian W Hamm; Heinz F Pitschner; Malte Kuniss; Thomas Neumann Journal: Circ J Date: 2013-06-12 Impact factor: 2.993
Authors: Daniel Steven; Arian Sultan; Vivek Reddy; Jakob Luker; Manuel Altenburg; Boris Hoffmann; Thomas Rostock; Helge Servatius; William G Stevenson; Stephan Willems; Gregory F Michaud Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-05-01 Impact factor: 24.094