Comparison between First- and Second-Generation Cryoballoon for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Ablation

Introduction. Cryoballoon (CB) ablation has emerged as a novel treatment for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). The second-generation Arctic Front Advance (ADV) was redesigned with technical modifications aiming at procedural and outcome improvements. We aimed to compare the efficacy of the two different technologies over a long-term follow-up. Methods. A total of 120 patients with PAF were enrolled. Sixty patients underwent PVI using the first-generation CB and 60 patients with the ADV catheter. All patients were evaluated over a follow-up period of 2 years. Results. There were no significant differences between the two groups of patients. Procedures performed with the first-generation CB showed longer fluoroscopy time (36.3±16.8 versus 14.2±13.5 min, resp.; p=0.00016) and longer procedure times as well (153.1±32 versus 102±24.8 min, resp.; p=0.019). The overall long-term success was significantly different between the two groups (68.3 versus 86.7%, resp.; p=0.017). No differences were found in the lesion areas of left and right PV between the two groups (resp., p=0.61 and 0.57). There were no significant differences in procedural-related complications. Conclusion. The ADV catheter compared to the first-generation balloon allows obtaining a significantly higher success rate after a single PVI procedure during the long-term follow-up. Fluoroscopy and procedural times were significantly shortened using the ADV catheter

Atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia treatment using CARTO 3 V7 activation mapping: a new era of slow pathway radiofrequency ablation is under coming

BackgroundSlow pathway (SP) ablation is the cornerstone for atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT) treatment, and a low-voltage bridge offers a good target during mapping using low x-ray exposure. We aimed to assess a new tool to identify SP by activation mapping using the last CARTO3® version, i.e., CARTO PRIME® V7 (Biosense Webster, Diamond Bar, CA, USA)Methods and resultsRight atrial septum and triangle of Koch 3D-activation map were obtained from intracardiac contact mapping during low x-ray CARTO 3® procedure. In 60 patients (mean age 60.3 ± 14.7, 61% females) undergoing ablation for AVNRT, an automatic activation map using a DECANAV® mapping catheter and CARTO® Confidense™, Coherent, and FAM DX software modules were obtained. The SP was identified in all patients as the latest atrioventricular node activation area; RF catheter ablation (RFCA) in that region elicited junctional beats. The mean procedural time was 150.3 ± 48.3 min, the mean fluoroscopy time exposure was 2.9 ± 2 min, the mean dose-area product (DAP) was 16.5 ± 2.7 cGy/cm2. The mean number of RF applications was 3.9 ± 2, the mean ablation index was 428.6 ± 96.6, and the mean contact force was 8 ± 2.8 g. There were no adverse event during the procedure, and no AVNRT recurrences occurred during a mean follow-up of 14.3 ± 8.3 months.ConclusionAblation of the SP by automatic mapping using Confidense™, Coherent, and FAM DX software modules is an innovative, safe, and effective approach to AVNRT ablation. The CARTO3® V7 system shows on a 3D map the latest AV node activation area during sinus rhythm allowing low fluoroscopy time and highly effective RFCA

Comparison between First-and Second-Generation Cryoballoon for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Ablation

Introduction. Cryoballoon (CB) ablation has emerged as a novel treatment for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). The second-generation Arctic Front Advance (ADV) was redesigned with technical modifications aiming at procedural and outcome improvements. We aimed to compare the efficacy of the two different technologies over a long-term follow-up. Methods. A total of 120 patients with PAF were enrolled. Sixty patients underwent PVI using the firstgeneration CB and 60 patients with the ADV catheter. All patients were evaluated over a follow-up period of 2 years. Results. There were no significant differences between the two groups of patients. Procedures performed with the first-generation CB showed longer fluoroscopy time (36.3 ± 16.8 versus 14.2 ± 13.5 min, resp.; = 0.00016) and longer procedure times as well (153.1 ± 32 versus 102±24.8 min, resp.; = 0.019). The overall long-term success was significantly different between the two groups (68.3 versus 86.7%, resp.; = 0.017). No differences were found in the lesion areas of left and right PV between the two groups (resp., = 0.61 and 0.57). There were no significant differences in procedural-related complications. Conclusion. The ADV catheter compared to the first-generation balloon allows obtaining a significantly higher success rate after a single PVI procedure during the long-term follow-up. Fluoroscopy and procedural times were significantly shortened using the ADV catheter