Does the third-generation cryoballoon improve procedural efficacy and safety compared to the second-generation cryoballoon in patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation?
The third-generation cryoballoon improves real-time pulmonary vein isolation monitoring compared to the second-generation device, but its shortened distal tip requires modified catheter maneuvers to prevent balloon dislodgement.
AIM: A novel third-generation cryoballoon (CB3) to perform pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has recently been released, featuring a shortened distal balloon tip when compared with the second-generation (CB2), possibly allowing for enhanced intra-ablation pulmonary vein (PV) signal mapping. We aimed to investigate procedural efficacy and safety of the CB3 as compared to the CB2. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 472 consecutive patients who underwent CB-PVI for paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (CB3: 49 patients; CB2: 423 patients). Detailed procedural data and in-hospital complications were registered in a prospective database. Complete PVI using the CB only was achieved in 98% of patients in each group. Single-freeze PVI was observed in 84/88% (CB2/CB3, P = n.s.) of the PVs. Time-to-PVI (TPVI) was 49 ± 32 (CB2) and 45 ± 27 s (CB3) (P = n.s.). Time-to-PVI determination rate was higher in the CB3 group (89.5 vs. 82.6%, P = 0.016). Signal noise due to ice formation on mapping electrodes occurred after 70 ± 46 s using CB3 and did not interfere with TPVI determination. Exchange of the spiral mapping catheter with a guide wire was more frequently required in the CB3 group (8.2 vs. 0.7% patients, P < 0.001). Balloon dislodgement during hockey stick manoeuvres occurred in 6.1% patients of the CB3 group only (P = 0.001). Complication rates were not different between the groups. CONCLUSION: The CB3 offers a higher TPVI determination rate, facilitating dosing schemes based on TPVI, with equally high single-freeze efficacy compared with the CB2. The shortened distal tip of the CB3 requires adaptation of standard catheter manoeuvers to avoid balloon dislodgement.
Fürnkranz et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: