A tale of two balloons: technical and procedural difference between cryoballoon systems

• Published in: Current Opinion in Cardiology
• Main Authors: Tomaiko-Clark, Emrie, Bai, Rong, Khokhar, Mateen, Su, Wilber W.
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) 2021
• Subjects: Arctic
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/hco.0000000000000942; https://journals.lww.com/10.1097/HCO.0000000000000942

Purpose of review The cryoballoon catheter has been an option for the treatment of atrial fibrillation for over a decade. The most widely used device is the Medtronic Arctic Advance cryoballoon catheter. Recently, Boston Scientific has released the POLARx cryoballoon catheter. Here we review the major changes in the catheter system's design and its implications for procedural practice. Recent findings The POLARx cryoballoon catheter has been approved for use in Europe. Some studies have been published detailing the first clinical experiences in vivo with this newest technology. Summary The changes to the POLARx cryoballoon catheter, particularly its ability to maintain balloon size and pressure, will improve occlusion and theoretically improve procedural outcomes.