Key result
Cryoballoon ablation compared to radiofrequency ablation resulted in primary endpoint rates of 30% vs 28% (RR 0.96) for death, cerebrovascular events, or serious complications.
Why the study?
The study aimed to provide a comparative assessment of the efficacy and safety of two catheter treatment strategies in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.
Does cryoballoon ablation improve outcomes compared to radiofrequency ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=127)
Does cryoballoon ablation improve outcomes compared to radiofrequency ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation?
In patients with persistent atrial fibrillation, cryoballoon and radiofrequency ablation demonstrated similar rates of the primary composite endpoint of death, cerebrovascular events, or serious complications.
Contact-force RFA may improve long-term success versus cryoballoon ablation in persistent AF; extends PVI strategy comparisons in RCT data.
INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary vein isolation is the primary goal in treating patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation using catheter ablation. This study's purpose is a comparative assessment of the efficacy and safety of two strategies for catheter treatment in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 127 patients with persistent atrial fibrillation during the last six months before inclusion in the study. The average follow-up period was 24 months. RESULTS: The primary efficacy endpoint (death, cerebrovascular event, or serious complications associated with treatment) occurred in 15 patients in the cryoballoon ablation group and 14 patients in the radiofrequency ablation group. The Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were 30% and 28%, and the risk ratio 0.96 and 95% of the confidence interval. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment in patients with persistent atria fibrillation, using catheter ablation with contact force control catheter treatment with the pulmonary vein isolation, was more efficient.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Baimbetov et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in persistent atrial fibrillation (n=127). Cryoballoon ablation vs. Radiofrequency ablation was evaluated on death, cerebrovascular event, or serious complications associated with treatment (RR 0.96). Cryoballoon ablation compared to radiofrequency ablation resulted in primary endpoint rates of 30% vs 28% (RR 0.96) for death, cerebrovascular events, or serious complications.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: