Ice or fire? Comparison of second‐generation cryoballoon ablation and radiofrequency ablation in patients with symptomatic persistent atrial fibrillation and an enlarged left atrium

Ice or fire? Comparison of second‐generation cryoballoon ablation and radiofrequency ablation... 1INTRODUCTIONFor treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF), pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) by cryoballoon (CB) ablation is an effective and safe technique with many potential advantages over radiofrequency (RF) ablation. The second‐generation CB (CB‐Adv, Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) is effective for acute PVI and shows good clinical outcomes. RF and CB‐Adv PVI reportedly show comparable outcomes among persistent AF patients, as indicated by one study conducted without contact force (CF)‐sensing catheters and another with only a 1‐year follow‐up. Here, we compared arrhythmia recurrence rates for CB‐Adv and RF catheters with a longer follow‐up period, including CF‐sensing catheters, among persistent AF patients with left atrial (LA) enlargement, some of whom received roof lines (RLs) plus PVI.2METHODS2.1Study populationThis observational cohort study involved patients with persistent AF and LA dilatation who underwent initial RF or CB‐Adv ablation as index procedure at our institution since May 2012. Patient selection for one or the other energy group was not made depending on the patient's characteristics but on the habits of the operator performing the ablation procedure. The latter used the same ablation energy for all his AF ablations. All variables at time of procedure were defined and categorized according to the literature or common practice. Persistent http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology Wiley

Ice or fire? Comparison of second‐generation cryoballoon ablation and radiofrequency ablation in patients with symptomatic persistent atrial fibrillation and an enlarged left atrium