Arrhythmias & electrophysiology
Cryoballoon vs radiofrequency ablation in persistent atrial fibrillation: the CRRF-PeAF trial
Primary resultResult — go to the resultHazard ratio .99 95% CI .69-1.43Authors' conclusion
In this randomized trial, cryoballoon ablation was non-inferior to radiofrequency ablation for the occurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias at 1 year in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with persistent AF499 analysed
- Participants
- 500 patients
- Comparison
- Cryoballoon vs radiofrequency ablation
- Cryoballoonn = 249
- Radiofrequencyn = 250reference
- Primary endpoint
- Occurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias (90-day blanking period after ablation)
- Follow-up
- 1 year
Methodological detailsprospective, multicentre, non-inferiority, 12 centres
- Prospective
- Multicentre
- Non-inferiority
- 12 centres
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Hazard ratio
.99
95% CI .69-1.43
P = 0.96
Events by treatment group
Cryoballoonvs Radiofrequency
HR .99 (95% CI .69-1.43); P = 0.96
Further findings
mL/m²
| Outcome | Cryoballoon | Radiofrequency | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Change in left atrial volume index · 1 yearGreater reduction with radiofrequency | −4 (IQR −13–3) | −11 (IQR −19–-4) | P < 0.001 |
Original publication
Cryoballoon vs radiofrequency ablation in persistent atrial fibrillation: the CRRF-PeAF trial. Eur Heart J. Published 24 July 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →