Catheter ablation using the third-generation cryoballoon provides an enhanced ability to assess time to pulmonary vein isolation facilitating the ablation strategy: Short- and long-term results of a multicenter study

• Published in: Heart rhythm Vol. 13; no. 12; pp. 2306 - 2313
• Main Authors: Aryana, Arash, MS, MD, FHRS, Kowalski, Marcin, MD, FHRS, O’Neill, Padraig Gearoid, MD, FHRS, Koo, Charles H., MD, Lim, Hae W., PhD, Khan, Asif, MD, Hokanson, Robert B., BA, Bowers, Mark R., MS, MD, Kenigsberg, David N., MD, FHRS, Ellenbogen, Kenneth A., MD, FHRS
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.12.2016
• Subjects: Aged; Atrial fibrillation; Atrial Fibrillation - epidemiology; Atrial Fibrillation - surgery; Cardiovascular; Catheter ablation; Catheter Ablation - adverse effects; Catheter Ablation - methods; Cohort Studies; Cryoablation; Cryoballoon; Cryosurgery - instrumentation; Cryosurgery - methods; Equipment Design; Female; Humans; Long Term Adverse Effects - diagnosis; Long Term Adverse Effects - epidemiology; Male; Middle Aged; Pulmonary vein isolation; Pulmonary Veins - surgery; Quality Improvement; Recurrence; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; United States - epidemiology; Cryoablation; Cryoballoon; Catheter ablation; Atrial fibrillation; Pulmonary vein isolation
• ISSN: 1547-5271; 1556-3871
• DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.08.011

Background Limited data exist on cryoablation of atrial fibrillation (Cryo-AF) using the newly available third-generation (Arctic Front Advance-Short Tip [AFA-ST]) cryoballoon. Objective In this multicenter study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of Cryo-AF using the AFA-ST vs the second-generation (Arctic Front Advance [AFA]) cryoballoon. Methods We examined the procedural safety and efficacy and the short- and long-term clinical outcomes associated with a first-time Cryo-AF performed in 355 consecutive patients (254/355 [72%] with paroxysmal AF), using either the AFA-ST (n = 102) or the AFA (n = 253) cryoballoon catheters. Results Acute isolation was achieved in 99.6% of all pulmonary veins (PVs) (AFA-ST: 100% vs AFA: 99.4%; P = .920). Time to pulmonary vein isolation was recorded in 89.2% of PVs using AFA-ST vs 60.2% using AFA ( P < .001). PVs targeted using AFA-ST required fewer applications (1.6 ± 0.8 vs 1.7 ± 0.8; P = .023), whereas there were no differences in the balloon nadir temperature (AFA-ST: −47.0°C ± 7.3°C vs AFA: −47.5°C ± 7.8°C; P = .120) or thaw time (AFA-ST: 41 ± 24 seconds vs AFA: 44 ± 28 seconds; P = .056). However, AFA-ST was associated with shorter left atrial dwell time (43 ± 5 minutes vs 53 ± 16 minutes; P < .001) and procedure time (71 ± 11 minutes vs 89 ± 25 minutes; P < .001). Furthermore, Cryo-AF using AFA-ST was completed more frequently by “single-shot” PV ablation (27.4% vs 20.2%; P = .031). Persistent phrenic nerve palsy (AFA-ST: 0% vs AFA: 0.8%; P = .507) and procedure-related adverse events (AFA-ST: 1.0% vs AFA: 1.6%; P = .554) were similar, as was the freedom from recurrent atrial arrhythmias at 10 months of follow-up (AFA-ST: 81.8% vs AFA: 79.9%; P = .658). Conclusion Cryo-AF using the AFA-ST cryoballoon offers an enhanced ability to assess time to pulmonary vein isolation, allowing for fewer cryoapplications and shorter left atrial dwell time and procedure time. Consequently, this allowed for procedural completion more frequently using a “single-shot” PV ablation with equivalent safety and efficacy.