Cryoballoon Versus Laserballoon

Author:

Chun Julian K.R.12ORCID,Bordignon Stefano1ORCID,Last Jana1,Mayer Lukas1ORCID,Tohoku Shota1ORCID,Zanchi Simone1ORCID,Bianchini Lorenzo1ORCID,Bologna Fabrizio1ORCID,Nagase Takahiko1,Urbanek Lukas1ORCID,Chen Shaojie1ORCID,Schmidt Boris1

Affiliation:

1. Cardioangiologisches Centrum Bethanien (CCB), Medizinische Klinik III, Kardiologie, Agaplesion Markuskrankenhaus, Frankfurt am Main, Germany (J.K.R.C., S.B., J.L., L.M., S.T., S.Z., L.B., F.B., T.N., L.U., S.C., B.S.).

2. Medizinische Klinik II, Kardiologie/Angiologie/Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Universität zu Lübeck, Germany (J.K.R.C.).

Abstract

Background: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) represents the cornerstone in atrial fibrillation ablation. Cryoballoon and laserballoon catheters have emerged as promising devices but lack randomized comparisons. Therefore, we sought to compare efficacy and safety comparing both balloons in patients with persistent and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: Symptomatic AF patients (n=200) were prospectively randomized (1:1) to receive either cryoballoon or laserballoon PVI (cryoballoon: n=100: 50 paroxysmal atrial fibrillation + 50 persistent AF versus laserballoon: n=100: 50 paroxysmal atrial fibrillation + 50 persistent AF). All antiarrhythmic drugs were stopped after ablation. Follow-up included 3-day Holter-ECG recordings and office visits at 3, 6, and 12 months. Primary efficacy end point was defined as freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia between 90 and 365 days after a single ablation. Secondary end points included procedural parameters and periprocedural complications. Results: Patient baseline parameters were not different between both groups. In all (n=200) complete PVI was obtained and the entire follow-up accomplished. Balloon only PVI was obtained in 98% (cryoballoon) versus 95% (laserballoon) requiring focal touch-up in 2 and 5 patients, respectively. Procedure but not fluoroscopy time was significantly shorter in the cryoballoon group (50.9±21.0 versus 96.0±20.4 minutes; P <0.0001 and 7.4±4.4 versus 8.4±3.2 minutes, P =0.083). Overall, the primary end point of no atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence was met in 79% (cryoballoon: 80.0% versus laserballoon: 78.0%, P =ns). No death, atrio-esophageal fistula, tamponade, or vascular laceration requiring surgery occurred. In the cryoballoon group, 8 transient but no persistent phrenic nerve palsy were noted compared with 2 persistent phrenic nerve palsy and one transient ischemic attack in the laserballoon group. Conclusions: Both balloon technologies represent highly effective and safe tools for PVI resulting in similar favorable rhythm outcome after 12 months. Use of the cryoballoon is associated with significantly shorter procedure but not fluoroscopy time.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Physiology (medical),Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3