Pulmonary vein isolation using second-generation single-shot devices: not all the same?

• Published in: Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology 2021-04, Vol.60 (3), p.521-528
• Main Authors: Seidl, Philipp, Steinborn, Frank, Costello-Boerrigter, Lisa, Surber, Ralf, Schulze, Paul C., Böttcher, Christine, Sommermeier, Andreas, Mattea, Violeta, Simeoni, Roland, Malur, Frank Michael, Lapp, Harald, Schade, Anja
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Ablation; Arrhythmia; Cardiology; Catheters; Complications; Fibrillation; Gold; Medical instruments; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Success
• ISSN: 1383-875X; 1572-8595
• DOI: 10.1007/s10840-020-00751-9

Introduction Single-shot devices have been developed to simplify pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). Randomized studies of the second-generation cryoballoon (CB 2nd) demonstrated excellent results. There are limited data comparing results of circular pulmonary vein ablation catheter (PVAC) with conventional RF ablation or CB for PVI. Objective Using a sequential registry cohort and a prospective randomized study, we aimed to compare the acute and long-term results of CB 2nd and PVAC Gold. Methods In the registry, consecutive patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing their first PVI were included. The preferred method used was PVAC Gold in 2014 and CB 2nd in 2015. Subsequently, a randomized study (PVAC vs. CB 2nd) was performed. Ablation success was measured as freedom of AF or atrial tachycardias (AT) off antiarrhythmic drugs. Results In the registry cohort, PVAC Gold was used in 60 patients and CB 2nd in 56 patients (age 66 ± 11 years, 52% male, LAD 43 ± 6). In the randomized study, 20 patients were treated with PVAC Gold and 22 with CB 2nd (age 67 ± 9; 43% men, LAD 40 ± 7 mm). During a mean follow up of 13.2 ± 3.6 months, success was 54% in PVAC Gold patients and 81% in CB 2nd cases ( p  = 0.001). In the randomized study 12 months success was 50% versus 86%, p