Arrhythmias & electrophysiologyCohort study
Efficacy and safety of pulmonary vein isolation with pulsed field ablation vs. novel cryoballoon ablation system for atrial fibrillation
- Observational cohort study
- consecutive patients
Authors' conclusion
Procedural characteristics were very similar between PFA and CB in regard to procedure duration fluoroscopy time and complications. Atrial fibrillation free survival did not differ between the PFA and CB groups.
Study context
- Population
- Consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI)
- Participants
- 181 patients
- Exposure
- PVI with pulsed-field ablation (PFA) vs novel cryoballoon (CB) system
- PFAn = 106
- CBn = 75reference
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Procedure, left atrial dwell and fluoroscopic times
| Group | Procedure time | Left atrial dwell time | Fluoroscopic time |
|---|---|---|---|
| PFA | 55 (IQR 43-64) | 38 (30-49) | 11 (IQR 9.3-14) |
| CB | 58 (IQR 48-69) | 37 (31-48) | 11 (IQR 8.7-16) |
- PFA vs CB: P < 0.087 — procedure time
- PFA vs CB: P = 0.871 — left atrial dwell time
- PFA vs CB: P < 0.81 — fluoroscopic time
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
AF recurrence · median follow-up 404 days (IQR 208-560)
P = 0.406
Safety
| Outcome | PFA | CB |
|---|---|---|
| Procedural complications | ||
| Tamponade | 2 | Not reported in the abstract |
| Temporary ST elevation | 1 | Not reported in the abstract |
| Reversible phrenic nerve palsy | Not reported in the abstract | 3 |
Original publication
Efficacy and safety of pulmonary vein isolation with pulsed field ablation vs. novel cryoballoon ablation system for atrial fibrillation. Europace. Published 30 November 2023. doi:10.1093/europace/euad329
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it