Comparison between First-and Second-Generation Cryoballoon for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Ablation

• Published in: Cardiology Research and Practice
• Main Authors: Conti, Sergio, Moltrasio, Massimo, Fassini, Gaetano, F. Tundo, Riva, Stefania, Dello Russo, Antonio, Casella, Michela, B. Majocchi, Marino, Vittoria, De Iuliis, Pasquale, Catto, Valentina, Pala, Salvatore, C. Tondo
• Other Authors: C. Sergio, M. Massimo, F. Gaetano, R. Stefania, D.R. Antonio, C. Michela, M. Vittoria, D.I. Pasquale, C. Valentina, P. Salvatore
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Hindawi 2016
• Subjects: Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine; Settore MED/11 - Malattie dell'Apparato Cardiovascolare; Arctic
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/2434/534506; https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/5106127

INTRODUCTION: Cryoballoon (CB) ablation has emerged as a novel treatment for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). The second-generation Arctic Front Advance (ADV) was redesigned with technical modifications aiming at procedural and outcome improvements. We aimed to compare the efficacy of the two different technologies over a long-term follow-up. METHODS: A total of 120 patients with PAF were enrolled. Sixty patients underwent PVI using the first-generation CB and 60 patients with the ADV catheter. All patients were evaluated over a follow-up period of 2 years. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups of patients. Procedures performed with the first-generation CB showed longer fluoroscopy time (36.3 ± 16.8 versus 14.2 ± 13.5 min, resp.; p = 0.00016) and longer procedure times as well (153.1 ± 32 versus 102 ± 24.8 min, resp.; p = 0.019). The overall long-term success was significantly different between the two groups (68.3 versus 86.7%, resp.; p = 0.017). No differences were found in the lesion areas of left and right PV between the two groups (resp., p = 0.61 and 0.57). There were no significant differences in procedural-related complications. CONCLUSION: The ADV catheter compared to the first-generation balloon allows obtaining a significantly higher success rate after a single PVI procedure during the long-term follow-up. Fluoroscopy and procedural times were significantly shortened using the ADV catheter.