Why the study?
Does cryoballoon ablation prevent clinical failure in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation compared to radiofrequency ablation?
Does cryoballoon ablation prevent clinical failure in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation compared to radiofrequency ablation?
This editorial provides an overview of the FIRE AND ICE trial, which evaluated the non-inferiority of cryoballoon versus radiofrequency ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
Whilst radiofrequency ablation is widely considered the “gold standard” for pulmonary-vein isolation, cryoballoon ablation is considered easier to perform. The aim of the randomised, multicentre FIRE AND ICE trial was to demonstrate, in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, the non-inferiority of cryoballoon ablation with respect to the time to a first documented clinical failure within 1 year outside a 90-day “blanking period” after the index ablation. This editorial gives an overview of the trial and its findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kück et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: