Key result
Cryoablation significantly increased the likelihood of atrial contractility recovery at 1 year compared to radiofrequency ablation (OR 2.540) in patients with atrial fibrillation.
Why the study?
Does surgical cryoablation improve atrial contractility and survival compared to radiofrequency ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Population
239 patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent surgical ablation at a single institution
Comparison
Surgical cryoablation (n=99) vs Surgical radiofrequency ablation (n=140)
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
median 36 months
Authors
Loading...
May support preferring cryoablation for atrial recovery in surgical AF; leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
Cohort (n=239)
No
Does surgical cryoablation improve atrial contractility and survival compared to radiofrequency ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Odds Ratio: 2.54 (95% CI 1.063–6.071)
Absolute Event Rate: 48.8% vs 32.2%
p-value: p=0.036
Surgical cryoablation for atrial fibrillation is associated with better recovery of atrial contractility and left ventricular function compared to radiofrequency ablation, though long-term survival and MACCE rates are similar.
Kim et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation (n=239). Cryoablation vs. Radiofrequency ablation was evaluated on Recovery of atrial contractility at 1 year (OR 2.540, 95% CI 1.063-6.071, p=0.036). Cryoablation significantly increased the likelihood of atrial contractility recovery at 1 year compared to radiofrequency ablation (OR 2.540) in patients with atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: