PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
November 16, 2010Circulation171 citationsOpen Access

Cryoablation Versus Radiofrequency Energy for the Ablation of Atrioventricular Nodal Reentrant Tachycardia (the CYRANO Study)

View Full Paper
IDIsabel DeisenhoferBZBernhard ZrennerYYYuehui Yin

Key Points

  • This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of cryoablation versus radiofrequency catheter ablation for treating AV nodal reentrant tachycardia.
  • Randomized trial involving 509 patients, receiving either cryoablation (n=251) or RFCA (n=258) for AVNRT.

Structured PICO

Does slow pathway cryoablation reduce immediate ablation failure, permanent AV block, and AVNRT recurrence compared to radiofrequency catheter ablation in patients with atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia?

P
Population
509 patients with atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT)
I
Intervention
Slow pathway cryoablation
C
Comparator
Radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA)
O
Outcome
Composite of immediate ablation failure, permanent AV block, and AVNRT recurrence during a 6-month follow-upcomposite

Cryoablation for AVNRT offers lower pain perception and similar short-term success compared to RFCA, but is limited by longer procedure times, more device problems, and a significantly higher 6-month recurrence rate.

Abstract

Background— Cryoablation has emerged as an alternative to radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) for the treatment of atrioventricular (AV) nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT). The purpose of this prospective randomized study was to test whether cryoablation is as effective as RFCA during both short-term and long-term follow-up with a lower risk of permanent AV block. Methods and Results— A total of 509 patients underwent slow pathway cryoablation (n=251) or RFCA (n=258). The primary end point was immediate ablation failure, permanent AV block, and AVNRT recurrence during a 6-month follow-up. Secondary end points included procedural parameters, device functionality, and pain perception. Significantly more patients in the cryoablation group than the RFCA group reached the primary end point (12.6% versus 6.3%; P =0.018). Whereas immediate ablation success (96.8% versus 98.4%) and occurrence of permanent AV block (0% versus 0.4%) did not differ, AVNRT recurrence was significantly more frequent in the cryoablation group (9.4% versus 4.4%; P =0.029). In the cryoablation group, procedure duration was longer (138±54 versus 123±48 minutes; P =0.0012) and more device problems occurred (13 versus 2 patients; P =0.033). Pain perception was lower in the cryoablation group ( P <0.001). Conclusions— Cryoablation for AVNRT is as effective as RFCA over the short term but is associated with a higher recurrence rate at the 6-month follow-up. The risk of permanent AV block does not differ significantly between cryoablation and RFCA. The potential benefits of cryoenergy relative to ablation safety and pain perception are counterbalanced by longer procedure times, more device problems, and a high recurrence rate. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00196222.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Deisenhofer et al. (2010) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d5715c75589c71d767e0cchttps://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.110.970350
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper