CurrentCardio
Get Weekly

Arrhythmias & electrophysiology

Pulsed-field- vs. cryoballoon-based pulmonary vein isolation: lessons from repeat procedures

EuropacePublished Observational cohort study

Read the original article ↗
Cite

Authors' conclusion

During repeat ablation after previous PFA- or CBA-based PVI, electrical PV-reconduction rates and patterns were similar.

Study context

Population
Patients undergoing repeat ablation for symptomatic atrial arrhythmia recurrence after pulsed-field ablation (PFA) or cryoballoon ablation (CBA) index pulmonary vein isolation (PVI)repeat ablation: PFA 22/191, CBA 44/359
Participants
550 patients
Exposure
Repeat ablation after index PFA-PVI vs after index CBA-PVI
  • PFAn = 22
  • CBAn = 44reference
Outcome
PV reconduction at repeat ablation
Methodological detailsconsecutively enrolled
  • Consecutively enrolled

Main finding

As reported in the abstract

Reconduction of any PV (per patient)
GroupValueReconducting pulmonary vein (PVs)
PFA73%31/82 (38%)
CBA75%63/169 (37%)

Value

PFA73%
CBA75%

Reconducting pulmonary vein (PVs)

PFA31/82 (38%)
CBA63/169 (37%)
  • PFA vs CBA: P = 1.000 — any PV reconduction per patient
  • PFA vs CBA: P = 0.936 — reconducting PVs

Observational data: associations, not effects.

Further findings

Clinical atrial tachycardia

P = 0.515

Roof lines set

P = 0.023

Repeat procedure duration

P = 0.446

Fluoroscopy time

P = 0.739

Original publication

Pulsed-field- vs. cryoballoon-based pulmonary vein isolation: lessons from repeat procedures. Europace. Published 21 August 2024. doi:10.1093/europace/euae221
Read the original article ↗PubMed

Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it

Get them every week

New studies on this topic in My Week and in your Monday e-mail.

We e-mail you a sign-in link and a code. No password, no spam.