Novel Cryoballoon Ablation System for Single Shot Pulmonary Vein Isolation - The Prospective ICE-AGE-X Study

Pressure waveform analysis for occlusion assessment significantly reduces contrast medium use in cryoballoon pulmonary vein isolation

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary vein (PV) occlusion is crucial for adequate lesion formation during cryoballoon-guided pulmonary vein isolation (CB-PVI). PV occlusion is usually confirmed by angiographies over the inflated balloon device. The aim of our study was to analyze the safety and efficacy of pressure waveform-based PV occlusion assessment during CB-PVI utilizing a novel fully integrated pressure analysis tool.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) scheduled for CB-PVI were prospectively enrolled for pressure waveform-based PV occlusion assessment. A patient cohort receiving conventional angiographies served as control group. Patients with common PV ostia were excluded.

RESULTS

The study group consisted of 40 patients (16 females, mean age was 64.5 ± 9.7, 45% persistent AF). The control group consisted of 40 matched patients. All 160 PVs in the study group were successfully isolated without the use of additional venograms confirming PV occlusion. The mean procedure duration was 69 ± 12 min in the study group with a mean fluoroscopy duration of 11.5 ± 4.4 min. The mean contrast medium volume was 22 ± 9 ml in the study group and 36 ± 12 ml in the control group (p = 0.0001). Mean procedure duration, mean balloon temperatures, and mean ablation application durations did not differ significantly between the study and the control group. No periprocedural complications occurred.

CONCLUSION

CB-PVI utilizing a fully integrated pressure waveform analysis tool to assess PV occlusion is feasible and safe and significantly reduces the amount of contrast medium without impact on procedural parameters and freedom from arrhythmia recurrence.

2024 European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Rhythm Society/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation

In the last three decades, ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has become an evidence-based safe and efficacious treatment for managing the most common cardiac arrhythmia. In 2007, the first joint expert consensus document was issued, guiding healthcare professionals involved in catheter or surgical AF ablation. Mounting research evidence and technological advances have resulted in a rapidly changing landscape in the field of catheter and surgical AF ablation, thus stressing the need for regularly updated versions of this partnership which were issued in 2012 and 2017. Seven years after the last consensus, an updated document was considered necessary to define a contemporary framework for selection and management of patients considered for or undergoing catheter or surgical AF ablation. This consensus is a joint effort from collaborating cardiac electrophysiology societies, namely the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the Asia Pacific HRS, and the Latin American HRS.

2024 European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Rhythm Society/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation

In the last three decades, ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has become an evidence-based safe and efficacious treatment for managing the most common cardiac arrhythmia. In 2007, the first joint expert consensus document was issued, guiding healthcare professionals involved in catheter or surgical AF ablation. Mounting research evidence and technological advances have resulted in a rapidly changing landscape in the field of catheter and surgical AF ablation, thus stressing the need for regularly updated versions of this partnership which were issued in 2012 and 2017. Seven years after the last consensus, an updated document was considered necessary to define a contemporary framework for selection and management of patients considered for or undergoing catheter or surgical AF ablation. This consensus is a joint effort from collaborating cardiac electrophysiology societies, namely the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Heart Rhythm Society, the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society .

Feasibility and efficacy of a novel size adjustable cryoballoon for ablation of atrial fibrillation

The aim of the present case series was to characterize the feasibility of a novel size adjustable cryoballoon system (PolarX Fit, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA). This cryoballoon catheter can be inflated to two different diameters (28 mm and 31 mm) within the same procedure allowing vein adapted PVI. In summary, the novel size adjustable cryoballoon shows similar characteristics as the established versions. The intraprocedural flexibility of balloon size led to employment of the larger variant in the majority of freeze applications. Of note, in all but one procedure, both sizes were employed to ensure optimal occlusion for all veins. This initial series suggests that the size adjustable balloon offers more flexibility of obtain optimal occlusions in particular, in challenging anatomies, including common pulmonary vein ostia.

Very high-power short-duration catheter ablation for treatment of cardiac arrhythmias: Insights from the FAST and FURIOUS study series

The QDOT MICRO™ Catheter is a novel open-irrigated contact force-sensing radiofrequency ablation catheter. It offers very high-power short-duration (vHPSD) ablation with 90 W for 4 s to improve safety and efficacy of catheter ablation procedures. Although the QDOT MICRO™ Catheter was mainly designed for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) its versatility to treat atrial fibrillation (AF) and other types of arrhythmias was recently evaluated by the FAST and FURIOUS study series and other studies and will be presented in this article. Available study and registry data as well as case reports concerning utilization of the QDOT MICRO™ Catheter for the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias including AF, focal and macroreentry atrial tachycardia, typical atrial flutter by cavotricuspid isthmus block, premature ventricular contractions, and accessory pathways were reviewed and summarized. In summary, the QDOT MICRO™ Catheter showed safety and efficacy for PVI and is able to treat also other types of arrhythmias as is was recently evaluated by case reports and the FAST and FURIOUS studies.

Comparison of Arctic Front Advance Pro and POLARx cryoballoons for ablation therapy of atrial fibrillation: an intraprocedural analysis

INTRODUCTION

Cryoballoon (CB) ablation has become a popular method for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment. This study aimed to compare the intraprocedural ablation characteristics of two cryoballoons, Arctic Front Advance Pro™ (AFA-Pro, Medtronic) and POLARx™ (Boston Scientific).

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this retrospective single-center study, 230 symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent AF patients underwent CB ablation with either AFA-Pro or POLARx. Propensity-score matching resulted in two cohorts of 114 patients each. Baseline and procedural characteristics were comparable between both CBs. POLARx achieved lower minimal temperatures (e.g., left superior pulmonary vein, LSPV: AFA-Pro - 49.0 °C vs. POLARx - 59.5 °C) and lower temperatures at time-to-isolation (TTI). Additionally, POLARx reached lower temperatures faster, as evidenced by lower temperatures after 40 and 60 s, and a larger mean temperature change between 20 and 40 s. POLARx also had a greater area under the curve below 0 °C and a longer thawing phase. Both CBs achieved comparable high rates of final PV-isolation. TTI, minimal esophagus temperature, and first-pass isolation rates were similar between groups. Periprocedural complications, including phrenic nerve injuries, were comparable. Troponin levels in the left atrium were elevated with both systems. Values and change in troponin were numerically higher in the POLARx group (delta troponin: AFA-Pro 36.3 (26.4, 125.4) ng/L vs. POLARx 104.9 (49.5, 122.2) ng/L), p = 0.077).

CONCLUSION

AFA-Pro and POLARx are both highly effective and safe CB systems for PVI. POLARx exhibited significant faster and lower freezing characteristics, and numerically higher troponin levels might indicate greater myocardial injury. However, these differences did not translate into improved performance, procedural efficiency, or safety.

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.

Novel or established cryoballoon ablation system for pulmonary vein isolation: the prospective ICE-AGE-1 study

AIMS

Catheter ablation with a cryoballoon (CB) provides effective and durable pulmonary vein (PV) isolation (PVI) associated with encouraging clinical outcome data. The novel POLARx CB incorporates unique features, which may translate into improved safety, efficacy, and outcomes. The ICE-AGE-1 study aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and 1-year clinical follow-up of the POLARx CB in comparison to the Arctic Front Advance Pro CB (AF-CB4).

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 103 consecutive patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) who underwent POLARx-based PVI (POLARx group) were prospectively enrolled and were compared to 102 consecutive patients previously treated with the AF-CB4 (AF-CB4 group). The mean age was 68.7 ± 10.2 (POLARx) and 65.7 ± 12 (AF-CB4, P = 0.0551) years. A total of 412 (POLARx) and 404 (AF-CB4) PVs were identified. All PVs, except for one PV in the POLARx group, were successfully isolated. A significant difference regarding the mean minimal CB temperature reached using the POLARx CB (-56.1 ± 8.3°C) and AF-CB4 (-46.9 ± 10.1°C) was observed (P < 0.0001). Real-time PVI was visualized in 71% of PVs in the POLARx group and 46% of them in the AF-CB4 group (P < 0.001). The mean procedure time was comparable: 54.5 ± 17.1 min for POLARx and 59.4 ± 18.6 min for AF-CB4 (P = 0.0509). No differences were observed in terms of periprocedural complications. There were comparable rates in freedom of AF or atrial tachycardia recurrence after 12 months, beyond a 90-day long blanking period: 78.9% in the POLARx group vs. 77.2% in the AF-CB4 group (P = 0.804).

CONCLUSION

The novel POLARx CB showed similar safety, efficacy, and 1-year recurrence-free survival rates compared to the AF-CB4. A higher rate of real-time electrical PV recordings and significantly lower balloon temperatures were observed using the POLARx as compared to AF-CB4.

Acute procedural efficacy and safety of a novel cryoballoon for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: Results from the POLAR ICE study

INTRODUCTION

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is well established as a primary treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). The POLAR ICE study was designed to collect prospective real world data on the safety and effectiveness of the POLARx^TM cryoballoon for PVI to treat paroxysmal AF.

METHODS

POLAR ICE, a prospective, non-randomized, multicenter (international) registry (NCT04250714), enrolled 399 patients across 19 European centers. Procedural characteristics, such as time to isolation, cryoablations per pulmonary vein (PV), balloon nadir temperature, and occlusion grade were recorded. PVI was confirmed with entrance block testing.

RESULTS

Data on 372 de novo PVI procedures (n = 2190 ablations) were collected. Complete PVI was achieved in 96.8% of PVs. Procedure and fluoroscopy times were 68.2 ± 24.6 and 15.6 ± 9.6 min, respectively. Left atrial dwell time was 46.6 ± 18.3 min. Grade 3 or 4 occlusion was achieved in 98.2% of PVs reported and 71.2% of PVs isolation required only a single cryoablation. Of 2190 cryoapplications, 83% had a duration of at least 120 s; nadir temperature of these ablations averaged -56.3 ± 6.5°C. There were 6 phrenic nerve palsy events, 2 of which resolved within 3 months of the procedure.

CONCLUSION

This real-world usage data on a novel cryoballoon suggests this device is effective, safe, and relatively fast in centers with cryoballoon experience. These data are comparable to prior POLARx reports and in keeping with reported data on other cryoballoons. Future studies should examine the long-term outcomes and the relationship between biophysical parameters and outcomes for this novel cryoballoon.

Outcomes after cryoballoon ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation with the PolarX or the Arctic front advance pro: a prospective multicentre experience

AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare procedural efficacy and safety, including 1-year freedom from AF recurrence, between the novel cryoballoon system PolarX (Boston Scientific) and the Arctic Front Advance Pro (AFA-Pro) (Medtronic), in patients with paroxysmal AF undergoing PVI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This multicentre prospective observational study included 267 consecutive patients undergoing a first cryoablation procedure for paroxysmal AF (137 PolarX, 130 AFA-Pro). KM curves with the log-rank test was used to compare the 1-year freedom from AF recurrence between both groups. Multivariate Cox model was performed to evaluate whether the type of procedure (PolarX vs. AFA-Pro) had an impact on the occurrence of AF recurrences after adjustment on potentially confounding factors. The PolarX reaches lower temperatures than the AFA-Pro (LSPV 52 ± 5, vs. 59 ± 6; LIPV 49 ± 6 vs. 56 ± 6; right superior pulmonary vein: 49 ± 6 vs. 57 ± 7; right inferior pulmonary vein: 52 ± 6 vs. 59 ± 6; P < 0.0001). A higher rate of transient phrenic nerve palsy was found in patients treated with the PolarX system (15% vs. 7%, P = 0.05). After a mean follow-up of 15 ± 5 months, 20 patients (15%) had recurrences in AFA-Pro group and 27 patients (19%) in PolarX group (P = 0.35). Based on survival analysis, no significant difference was observed between both groups with a 12-month free of recurrence survival of 91.2% (85.1-95.4%) vs. 83.7% (76.0%-89.1%) (log-rank test P = 0.11). In multivariate Cox model hazard ratio of recurrence for PolarX vs. AFA-Pro was not significant [HR = 1.6 (0.9-2.8), P = 0.12].

CONCLUSION

PolarX and AFA-Pro have comparable efficacy and safety profiles for pulmonary veins isolation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

Efficacy and safety of a novel cryoballoon ablation system: multicentre comparison of 1-year outcome

AIMS

The aim of the study was to compare the 1-year efficacy and safety of a novel cryoballoon (NCB) ablation system (POLARx; Boston Scientific) for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) compared with the standard cryoballoon (SCB) system (Arctic Front, Medtronic).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing PVI using the NCB and the SCB at two centres were included. We report 1-year efficacy after 12 months, short-term safety and hospitalizations within the blanking period, and predictors for AF recurrence. In case of repeat procedures, pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection patterns were characterized. Eighty patients (age 66 ± 10 years, ejection fraction 57 ± 10%, left atrial volume index 39 ± 13 mL/m2, paroxysmal AF in 64%) were studied. After a single procedure and a follow-up of 12 months, 68% in the NCB group and 70% in the SCB group showed no recurrence of AF/atrial tachycardias (P = 0.422). One patient in the NCB group suffered a periprocedural stroke with full recovery. There were no differences regarding hospitalizations during follow-up between the groups. PV reconnection observed during 12 repeat procedures (4 NCB, 8 SCB) pattern was comparable between the groups with more reconnections in the right-sided compared with the left-sided PVs.

CONCLUSION

In this multicentre study comparing two currently available cryoballoon ablation systems for PVI, no differences were observed in the efficacy and safety during a follow-up of 12 months.

Comparison of the acute outcome of two cryoballoon technologies for pulmonary vein isolation: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Initial experience suggests that the POLARx cryoballoon system (Boston Scientific) has a similar procedural efficacy and safety as Arctic Front Advance Pro (AFA-Pro, Medtronic). We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis comparing POLARx and AFA-Pro. Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases were searched until 12/01/2022 for studies comparing POLARx versus AFA-Pro in patients undergoing pulmonary vein (PV) isolation for AF. A total of 8 studies, involving 1146 patients from 11 European centers were included (POLARx n = 317; AFA-Pro n = 819). There were no differences in acute PV isolation, procedure time, fluoroscopy time, ablation time, minimal esophageal temperature, and risk of phrenic nerve palsy or thromboembolic events. Balloon nadir temperatures were lower for POLARx in all PVs. Compared with AFA-Pro, POLARx had a higher rate of first freeze isolation in the left inferior PV (LIPV) (odds ratio [OR]: 2.60; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 1.06 to 6.43; P = 0.04), higher likelihood of time-to-isolation (TTI) recording in LIPV (OR: 2.91; 95 % CI: 1.54 to 5.49; P = 0.001) and right inferior PV (OR: 3.23; 95 % CI: 1.35 to 7.74; P = 0.008). In contrast, the TTI in LIPV was longer with POLARx in comparison to AFA-Pro (mean difference: 7.61 sec; 95 % CI 2.43 to 12.8 sec; P = 0.004). In conclusion, POLARx and AFA-Pro have a similar acute outcome. Interestingly, there was a higher rate of TTI recording in the inferior PVs with POLARx. This updated meta-analysis provides new safety data on esophageal temperature and thromboembolic events.

Novel cryoballoon ablation system for pulmonary vein isolation: multicenter assessment of efficacy and safety-ANTARCTICA study

AIMS

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) either by balloon devices or radiofrequency forms the cornerstone of invasive atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment. Although equally effective cryoballoon (CB)-based PVI offers shorter procedure duration and a better safety profile. Beside the worldwide established Arctic Front Advance system, a novel CB device, POLARx, was recently introduced. This CB incorporates unique features, which may translate into improved efficacy and safety. However, multicentre assessment of periprocedural efficacy and safety is lacking up to date.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 317 patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF were included and underwent POLARx CB-based PVI in 6 centres from Germany and Italy. Acute efficacy and safety were assessed in this prospective multicenter observational study. In 317 patients [mean age: 64 ± 12 years, 209 of 317 (66%) paroxysmal AF], a total of 1256 pulmonary veins (PVs) were identified and 1252 (99,7%) PVs were successfully isolated utilizing mainly the short tip POLARx CB (82%). The mean minimal CB temperature was -57.9 ± 7°C. Real-time PVI was registered in 72% of PVs. The rate of serious adverse events was 6.0% which was significantly reduced after a learning curve of 25 cases (9.3% vs. 3.0%, P = 0.018). The rate of recurrence-free survival after mean follow-up of 226 ± 115 days including a 90-day blanking period was 86.1%.

CONCLUSION

In this large multicentre assessment, the novel POLARx CB shows a promising efficacy and safety profile after a short learning curve.

Impact of pulmonary vein variant anatomy and cross-sectional orifice area on freedom from atrial fibrillation recurrence after cryothermal single-shot guided pulmonary vein isolation

BACKGROUND

Cryoballoon (CB)-guided pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is an established treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). This study aimed to evaluate ablation efficacy and freedom from arrhythmia recurrence using the novel POLARx compared to the Arctic Front Advance Pro (AFA) CB system including the analysis of individual PV characteristics.

METHODS

A total of 687 patients underwent CB-guided ablation for AF. Arrhythmia recurrence was defined as an ECG documented episode of any AF/atrial tachycardia (AT) > 30 s. Anatomical characteristics were assessed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). For each PV, the cross-sectional orifice area (CSOA) was determined. Follow-up examinations were scheduled after 3, 6, and 12 months.

RESULTS

Acute PVI was achieved in all patients. Twelve-month AF-free survival was similar between the groups (POLARx 43/86 (50%) vs. AFA 318/601 (53%), Log-rank (LR) p = 0.346). MRI found a comparable percentage of patients with normal PV anatomy (POLARx 71/86 (83%) vs. AFA 530/601 (85%), p = 0.162). Patients with variant PV characteristics presented with a significantly impaired 12-month AF-free survival (normal PVs 326/585 (56%) vs. variant PVs 27/102 (27%), LR p < 0.001) independent of the applied CB ablation system. PAF patients with AF recurrence presented with significantly larger CSOA of the left-sided PVs and the right superior PVs (LSPV: p < 0.001; LIPV: p < 0.001; RSPV: p < 0.001). In PERS AF, no association between CSOA and ablation outcome was observed. Multivariate analyses identified PERS AF (hazard ratio (HR) 2.504, confidence interval (CI), 1.900-3.299, p < 0.001) and variant PV anatomy (HR 2.124, CI 1.608-2.805, p < 0.001) as independent predictors for AF recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Both CB ablation systems are associated with comparable 12-month AF-free survival rates. Variant PV anatomy seems to be predictive for AF recurrence. An association between CSOA and the outcome after CB-guided PVI was demonstrated for PAF.

What we have learned: is pulmonary vein isolation still the cornerstone of atrial fibrillation ablation?

Ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is an established treatment option for symptomatic patients. The cornerstone of all ablation strategies is electrical isolation of the pulmonary veins (PVs). Ablation strategies going beyond PV isolation (PVI) might be considered in the setting of recurrent AF despite durably isolated PVs. The lack of persistent PVI, however, limits the opportunities to perceive the real impact of this endpoint on AF suppression and to fully understand the benefit of extended ablation strategies going beyond. To overcome this limitation, novel and innovative ablation systems have been developed to facilitate acute PVI and to increase its durability. These systems include balloon-based ablation devices incorporating different energy sources such as cryo energy, laser, or radiofrequency current, but also new energy sources such as pulsed field ablation as a non-thermal energy source. These technologies could advance catheter ablation of AF to an early stage of the disease and to the primary treatment tool. The current manuscript focuses on the past, the present, and the future value of PVI as the cornerstone for interventional treatment of AF and on how to achieve durable PVI during the first procedure and to further improve the clinical success rates of AF ablation. It also analyses extended ablation strategies going beyond PVI and their impact.

Innovations in atrial fibrillation ablation

BACKGROUND

Catheter-based ablation to perform pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has established itself as a mainstay in the rhythm control strategy of atrial fibrillation. This review article aims to provide an overview of recent advances in atrial fibrillation ablation technology.

METHODS

We reviewed the available literature and clinical trials of innovations in atrial fibrillation ablation technologies including ablation catheter designs, alternative energy sources, esophageal protection methods, electroanatomical mapping, and novel ablation targets.

RESULTS

Innovative radiofrequency (RF) catheter designs maximize energy delivery while avoiding overheating associated with conventional catheters. Single-shot balloon catheters in the form of cryoballoons, radiofrequency, and laser balloons have proven effective at producing pulmonary vein isolation and improving procedural efficiency and reproducibility. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a highly anticipated novel nonthermal energy source under development, which demonstrates selective ablation of the myocardium, producing durable lesions while also minimizing collateral damage. Innovative devices for esophageal protection including esophageal deviation and cooling devices have been developed to reduce esophageal complications. Improved electroanatomical mapping systems are being developed to help identify additional non-pulmonary triggers, which may benefit from ablation, especially with persistent atrial fibrillation. Lastly, the vein of Marshall alcohol ablation has been recently studied as an adjunct therapy for improving outcomes with catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation.

CONCLUSIONS

Numerous advances have been made in the field of atrial fibrillation ablation in the past decade. While further long-term data is still needed for these novel technologies, they show potential to improve procedural efficacy and safety.

[Catheter ablation : Developments and technique selection]

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia and an important risk factor for the occurrence of cardiovascular events. According to current guidelines, rhythm-controlling therapy is recommended only for symptomatic AF. Even in symptomatic AF there is still only a class IIa-recommendation for catheter ablation as initial therapy in paroxysmal AF. Meanwhile, current studies have shown an advantage of the early rhythm control compared to a rate control, as well as a benefit of catheter ablation compared to antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) treatment. The gold standard of catheter ablation for AF therapy is pulmonary vein isolation, which has been mainly radiofrequency-based in the past. However, cryoablation as a first-line therapy of paroxysmal AF is increasingly gaining importance, as the latest studies showed shorter procedure times, lower reintervention rates and improved life quality after cryoablation. Nevertheless, using these standard techniques, the risk of adverse events is still given through collateral damage. The field high-power short duration ablation is currently topic of ongoing AF research, which describes a radiofrequency ablation with higher energy levels, given over shorter duration, with a consecutive lower recurrence rate as well as procedure time. The new ablation techniques also include the pulsed field ablation, which allows ablation through very fast delivery of electrical pulses and causes isolated damage to myocardial cells without collateral damage. This promising technique passed the efficiency and safety testing in preclinical studies. To validate this technique further randomized trials are needed.

News from the Cold Chamber: Clinical Experiences of POLARx versus Arctic Front Advance for Single-Shot Pulmonary Vein Isolation

Cryoballoon (CB)-guided pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) represents a cornerstone in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Recently, a novel balloon-guided single shot device (POLARx, Boston Scientific) was designed. Our study aimed to compare the efficacy, safety and characteristics of the novel CB system with the established one (Arctic Front Advance (Pro), AFA, Medtronic). A total number of 596 patients undergoing CB-guided ablation for AF were included. 65 patients (65.0 ± 11.6, 31% female) undergoing PVI with the POLARx were compared to a cohort of 531 consecutive patients (63.0 ± 27.9, 25% female) treated with AFA. Acute PVI was achieved in all patients (n = 596, 100%). Total procedure duration (POLARx 113.3 ± 23.2 min, AFA 100.9 ± 21.3 min; p < 0.001) and fluoroscopy time (POLARx 10.5 ± 5.9 min, AFA 4.8 ± 3.6 min; p < 0.001) were significantly longer in the POLARx group. The POLARx balloon achieved significantly lower nadir temperatures (POLARx −57.7 ± 0.9 °C, AFA −45.1 ± 2.6 °C; p < 0.001) and a significantly higher percentage of pulmonary veins successfully isolated with the first freeze (p = 0.027 *). One major complication occurred in the POLARx (2%) and three (1%) in the AFA group. Both ablation systems are comparably safe and effective. AF ablation utilizing the POLARx system is associated with longer procedure and fluoroscopy times as well as lower nadir temperatures.

Novel cryoballoon to isolate pulmonary veins in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: long-term outcomes in a multicentre clinical study

BACKGROUND

Recently, a novel cryoballoon ablation catheter has demonstrated acute safety and efficacy in de novo pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) procedures in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). However, there are limited studies demonstrating the long-term efficacy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of this novel cryoballoon in treating PAF.

METHODS

This was a non-randomized, prospective, multicentre study enrolling 58 consecutive patients. Cryoablation was delivered for 180 s if time to isolation was ≤ 60 s. Otherwise a 240-s cryoablation was performed. One centre performed pre- and post-ablation high-density mapping (n = 9) to characterize lesion formation. After a 3-month blanking period, recurrence was defined as having any documented, symptomatic episode(s) of AF or atrial tachycardia. All patients were followed for 1 year.

RESULTS

Acute PVI was achieved in 230 of 231 pulmonary veins (99.6%) with 5.3 ± 1.6 cryoablations per patient (1.3 ± 0.7 cryoablations per vein). Forty-three (77%) patients remained arrhythmia-free at 1-year follow-up. Four patients (6.9%) experienced phrenic nerve injury (3 resolved during the index procedure; 1 resolved at 6 months). One serious adverse device event was reported: femoral arterial embolism event occurring 2 weeks post-index procedure. For patients who underwent high-density mapping, cryoablation was antral with 50% of the posterior wall ablated.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial multicentre clinical experience with a novel cryoballoon has demonstrated safety and efficacy of PVI in patients with PAF. Ablation with this cryoballoon provides a wide, antral lesion set with significant debulking of the posterior wall of the left atrium.

A tale of two balloons: technical and procedural difference between cryoballoon systems

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The cryoballoon catheter has been an option for the treatment of atrial fibrillation for over a decade. The most widely used device is the Medtronic Arctic Advance cryoballoon catheter. Recently, Boston Scientific has released the POLARx cryoballoon catheter. Here we review the major changes in the catheter system's design and its implications for procedural practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

The POLARx cryoballoon catheter has been approved for use in Europe. Some studies have been published detailing the first clinical experiences in vivo with this newest technology.

SUMMARY

The changes to the POLARx cryoballoon catheter, particularly its ability to maintain balloon size and pressure, will improve occlusion and theoretically improve procedural outcomes.

The established and the challenger: A direct comparison of current cryoballoon technologies for pulmonary vein isolation

INTRODUCTION

Cryoballoon (CB) ablation for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is an effective treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Recently, a novel cryoablation system was introduced. The aim of the study was to compare the safety, efficacy and biophysical characteristics of a novel cryoablation system (POLARx™; Boston Scientific) to a commonly used and clinically well characterized system (Arctic Front Advance Pro™, AFA; Medtronic).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Fifty consecutive patients with symptomatic AF, who underwent CB-based ablation with the POLARx were compared to 50 consecutive patients treated with the AFA. Acute PVI was achieved in 99.8% (POLARx 99.5%, AFA 100%, p = 1.00). Time to isolation (TTI) was comparable in both groups (POLARx 35 [27, 48] s, AFA 30 [21, 43] s, p = 0.165). The POLARx showed a lower balloon temperature at TTI (POLARx -44 [-50, -36] °C, AFA -31 [-38, -21] °C, p < 0.001) and lower nadir temperature (POLARx -60 [-65, -55] °C, AFA -48 [-54, -45] °C, p < 0.001). Procedure time (POLARx 80 [60, 105] min, AFA 62 [42, 80] min, p < 0.001), fluoroscopy time (POLARx 17 [13, 22] min, AFA 11 [7, 16] min, p < 0.001) and freeze cycles per patient (POLARx 5 [4, 6], AFA 4.5 [4, 5], p = 0.002) were higher in the POLARx group. Two cerebral ischemic events occurred in the POLARx group, two patients in each group had phrenic nerve injury.

CONCLUSION

Both systems enable effective isolation of pulmonary veins. The POLARx required longer procedure and fluoroscopy times. Larger, prospective and randomized studies are needed to assess long-term efficacy and safety of this technology.

[Practical guide for safe and efficient cryoballoon ablation for atrial fibrillation : Practical procedure, tips and tricks]

In the current guidelines on treatment of atrial fibrillation, cryoballoon-based catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation is recommended in addition to radiofrequency ablation and has become established as a standard procedure in the clinical routine of many centers for index pulmonary vein isolation. A safe, simplified and often durable pulmonary vein isolation can be achieved by a systematic approach. This review article provides a practical guide for all steps of cryoballoon-based pulmonary vein isolation, including preprocedural preparation and postinterventional follow-up. Both cryoballoon systems currently available on the market are considered.

Comparison of procedural efficacy, balloon nadir temperature, and incidence of phrenic nerve palsy between two cryoballoon technologies for pulmonary vein isolation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

In May 2020, a novel cryoballoon system (POLARx; Boston Scientific) became available for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). The design of the cryoballoon is comparable to the Arctic Front Advance Pro (AFA‐Pro; Medtronic), but it is more compliant during freezing. We compared the procedural efficacy, biophysical parameters, and risk of phrenic nerve palsy (PNP) between the two cryoballoons.

Methods

Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases were searched until June 1, 2021 for relevant studies comparing POLARx versus AFA‐Pro in patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for AF.

Results

A total of four studies, involving 310 patients were included. There was no difference between the two groups for outcomes regarding procedural efficacy: acute PVI (odds ratio [OR]: 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.06 to 3.03; p = .40), procedure time (mean difference [MD]: 8.15 min; 95% CI: −8.09 to 24.39; p = .33), fluoroscopy time (MD: 1.32 min; 95% CI: −1.61 to 4.25; p = .38) and ablation time (MD: 1.00 min; 95% CI: −0.20 to 2.20; p = .10). The balloon nadir temperature was lower for all individual pulmonary veins (PV) in POLARx compared with AFA‐Pro (MD: −9.74°C, −9.98°C, −6.72°C, −7.76°C, for left superior PV, left inferior PV, right superior PV, and right inferior PV, respectively; all p < .001). The incidence of PNP was similar between groups (OR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.22 to 2.85; p = .72).

Conclusion

In AF patients undergoing PVI, POLARx and AFA‐Pro had a similar procedural efficacy. Balloon nadir temperatures were lower with POLARx, however, the incidence of PNP was similar.