A prospective randomised comparison of large-tip cryoablation and 8-mm-tip radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial
Helena Malmborg1, Stefan Lönnerholm, Carina Blomström Lundqvist
1Department of Cardiology, Uppsala University Hospital, SE-751 85 Uppsala, Sweden. helena.malmborg@akademiska.se
Purpose:
Although radiofrequency (RF) energy is routinely used for tricuspid isthmus (TI) ablation, it is often associated with discomfort. The paucity of studies comparing the feasibility and efficacy of cryo- versus RF energy for TI-ablation urged us to conduct a prospective, randomised trial.
Methods:
Forty patients with atrial flutter (AFl) were randomised to RF- or cryoenergy for TI-ablation. Perceived pain was scored from 1 to 10 on a Visual Analogue Scale.
Results:
Significantly lower pain scores were recorded for cryoablation versus RF ablation (0.96 +/- 0.73 versus 4.2 +/- 2.4, p = 0.00004). Cryoablation was associated with significantly longer procedure duration and ablation time (137 +/- 35 versus 111 +/- 29 min, p = 0.016 and 81 +/- 40 versus 48 +/- 30 min, p = 0.007) and lower acute success rate (56% versus 100%, p = 0.001) than RF ablation. The recurrence of AFl was 20% (cryo) versus 15% (RF; p = 0.45) after a mean of 15.1 months follow-up.
Conclusion:
Cryoablation results in significantly less pain and discomfort compared to RF ablation of AFl, which is offset by the significantly lower acute success rate.
