Pulmonary vein size is associated with reconnection following cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation

Repeat catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is an established therapy that reduces AF burden, improves quality of life, and reduces the risks of cardiovascular outcomes. Although there are clear guidelines for the application of de novo catheter ablation, there is less evidence to guide recommendations for repeat catheter ablation in patients who experience recurrent AF. In this review, we examine the rationale for repeat ablation, mechanisms of recurrence, patient selection, optimal timing, and procedural strategies. We discuss additional important considerations, including treatment of comorbidities and risk factors, risk of complications, and effectiveness. Mechanisms of recurrent AF are often due to non-pulmonary vein (non-PV) triggers; however, there is insufficient evidence supporting the routine use of empiric lesion sets during repeat ablation. The emergence of pulsed field ablation may alter the safety and effectiveness of de novo and repeat ablation. Extrapolation of data from randomized trials of de novo ablation does not optimally inform efficacy in cases of redo ablation. Additional large, randomized controlled trials are needed to address important clinical questions regarding procedural strategies and timing of repeat ablation.

Characteristics of two different cryoballoon systems for treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial (CONTRAST-CRYO Trial)

BACKGROUND

Single-shot pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) utilizing cryothermal energy is an effective and safe treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. A novel cryoballoon system, POLARx™, has been recently introduced. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy, safety, and biophysical parameters of PVI between the novel cryoballoon system, POLARx™, and the standard cryoballoon system, Arctic Front Advance Pro™ (AFA-Pro), in patients with paroxysmal AF.

METHODS

The CONTRAST-CRYO trial is a prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled study performed at seven large cardiac centers. This study was approved by the central ethics committee or the local ethics committee of each participating hospital and has been registered at UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000049948). The trial will assign 200 patients with paroxysmal AF undergoing PVI to POLARx™ and AFA-Pro in a 1:1 randomization. The primary endpoint is the one-shot acute success rate of the right inferior pulmonary vein. Second endpoints include freedom from documented atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, or atrial tachycardia without antiarrhythmic drugs at 12 months after the procedure, freedom from re-do procedures, the incidence of procedure-related adverse events, freezing duration, and the biophysical parameters during applications for each PV, total procedure and fluoroscopy time, and PVI durability during re-do procedures.

CONCLUSION

The CONTRAST-CRYO trial is a prospective, multicenter, randomized study designed to elucidate the difference in the efficacy, safety, and biophysical parameters between POLARx™ and AFA-Pro in paroxysmal AF patients undergoing PVI. The findings from this trial may provide a valuable indication for selecting the optimal cryoballoon system.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

 UMIN000049948.

Difference in tissue temperature change between two cryoballoons

BACKGROUND

Cryoballoon ablation, especially Arctic Front Advance Pro (AFA-Pro) (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA), has been widely recognised as a standard approach to atrial fibrillation (AF). Recently, Boston Scientific has released a novel cryoballoon system (POLARx). Despite comparable acute clinical outcomes of these two cryoballoons, the recent study reported a higher complication rate, especially for phrenic nerve palsy, with POLARx. However, their impact on biological tissue remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of our study is to evaluate temperature change of biological tissue during cryoablation of each cryoballoon using a porcine experimental model.

METHOD

A tissue-based pulmonary vein model was constructed from porcine myocardial tissue and placed on a stage designed to simulate pulmonary vein anatomy and venous flow. Controlled cryoablations of AFA-Pro and POLARx were performed in this model to evaluate the tissue temperature. A temperature sensor was set behind the muscle and cryoballoon ablation was performed after confirming the occlusion of pulmonary vein with cryoballoon.

RESULTS

The mean tissue nadir temperature during cryoablation with AFA-Pro was -41.5°C±4.9°C, while the mean tissue nadir temperature during cryoablation with POLARx was -58.4°C±5.9°C (p<0.001). The mean balloon nadir temperature during cryoablation with AFA-Pro was -54.6°C±2.6°C and the mean balloon nadir temperature during cryoablation with POLARx was -64.7°C±3.8°C (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

POLARx could freeze the biological tissue more strongly than AFA-Pro.

Comparison of pulmonary vein isolation using cryoballoon, high-power short-duration, and conventional radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: a propensity score-weighted study

Background

The comparative efficacy, saftey, and heart rate variability (HRV) parameters after pulmonary vein isolation using cryoballoon (Cryo-PVI), high-power short-duration (HPSD-PVI), and conventional radiofrequency ablation (conventional-PVI) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear.

Materials and methods

In this propensity score-weighted, retrospective analysis of a single-center cohort, we analyzed 3,395 patients (26.2% female, 74.5% paroxysmal AF) who underwent AF catheter ablation without an empirical left atrial ablation. Procedural factors, recurrence rates, complication rates, and the post-procedural HRV parameters were compared across the Cryo-PVI (n = 625), HPSD-PVI (n = 748), and conventional-PVI (n = 2,022) groups.

Results

Despite the shortest procedural time in the Cryo-PVI group (74 min for Cryo-PVI vs. 104 min for HPSD-PVI vs. 153 min for conventional-PVI, p < 0.001), the major complication (p = 0.906) and clinical recurrence rates were similar across the three ablation groups (weighted log-rank, p = 0.824). However, the Cryo-PVI group was associated with a significantly lower risk of recurrent AF in patients with paroxysmal AF [weighted hazard ratio (WHR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37-0.86], whereas it was associated with a higher risk of recurrent AF in patients with persistent AF (WHR 1.41, 95% CI 1.06-1.89, p for interaction of <0.001) compared with the conventional-PVI group. In the subgroup analysis for the HRV, the Cryo-PVI group had the highest low-frequency-to-high-frequency ratio at 1-year post-procedure, whereas the HPSD-PVI group had the lowest low-frequency-to-high-frequency ratio at 1-year post-procedure (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The Cryo-PVI group had better rhythm outcomes in patients with paroxysmal AF but worse rhythm outcomes in patients with persistent AF and a higher long-term post-procedural sympathetic nervous activity and sympatho-vagal balance compared with the conventional-PVI group.