Cryoballoon ablation in atrial fibrillation: Advantages and drawbacks

Cryoballoon ablation of non-PV triggers in persistent atrial fibrillation

Cryoballoon-based catheter ablation has emerged as an efficacious and safe therapeutic intervention for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). PAF is primarily associated with the triggers in the pulmonary vein (PV). However, persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF) is a complex condition that involves changes in the atrial substrate and the presence of non-PV triggers. Therefore, a comprehensive treatment approach is necessary for patients with PeAF. Utilizing a 3D electroanatomical map, the radiofrequency-based ablation technique adeptly identifies and targets the atrial substrate and non-PV triggers. On the other hand, the cryoballoon-based AF ablation was initially designed for PV isolation. However, its single-shot feature makes it a great choice for electrophysiologists looking to address non-PV triggers. It is possible to target the left atrial appendage (LAA), superior vena cava (SVC), left atrial roof, and posterior wall using the apparatus's unique configuration and ablation abilities. This review focuses on the increasing literature regarding cryoballoon-based methods for non-PV trigger ablation. Specifically, it delves into the technical procedures used to isolate the LAA, SVC, and ablate the left atrial roof and posterior wall.

The Long-Term Results of Three Catheter Ablation Methods in Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A 4-Year Follow-Up Study

Aims: Catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) has been shown to be effective and safe. However, recurrence of PAF varies between 10 and 30% for radiofrequency ablation. There have been no reports comparing long-term recurrence rates following radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation, and three-dimensional guided cryoablation plus radiofrequency ablation. The aim of this study was to observe the long-term recurrence rate of PAF when treated by these three catheter ablation methods, and to explore clinical factors that can potentially predict PAF recurrence following catheter ablation. Methods: There were 238 patients involved in this study, including 106 radiofrequency (RF) ablation cases (RF group), 66 cryoablation cases (Freeze group), and 66 cases treated by three-dimensional guided cryoablation combined with radiofrequency ablation (Freeze-plus-RF group). All patients underwent standardized follow-up. The recurrence rate of atrial fibrillation (AF) in the three groups was calculated. Predictive factors for the recurrence of AF were also investigated. Results: At 48 months (the median follow-up period), the sinus rhythm maintenance rate was 77.4% in the RF group, 72.7% in the Freeze group, and 81.8% in the Freeze-plus-RF group. The maintenance rate of sinus rhythm was highest in the Freeze-plus-RF group, but differences among the three groups were not statistically significant. Further analysis found that the preoperative left atrial appendage emptying velocity (LAAEV) (recurrence vs. no recurrence, 56.58 ± 18.37 vs. 65.59 ± 18.83, respectively, p = 0.003), left atrial (LA) anteroposterior dimension (recurrence vs. no recurrence, 36.56 ± 4.65 vs. 35.00 ± 4.37, respectively; p = 0.028), and LA vertical dimension (recurrence vs. no recurrence, 56.31 ± 6.96 vs. 53.72 ± 6.52, respectively; p = 0.035) were related to postoperative recurrence. Multiple Cox regression analysis showed that only LAAEV was predictive of postoperative recurrence of PAF (hazard ratio: 0.979; 95% confidence interval: 0.961-0.997). Conclusion: Our study found that there was no statistically significant difference in long-term recurrence rates among the RF, Freeze, and Freeze-plus-RF groups. Preoperative LAAEV is an independent predictor of postoperative recurrence of PAF.