P1033
Cryo-ablation vs radiofrequency ablation: is there a difference between the two technologies - A single centre analysis of the sites pulmonary vein reconnection

EP Europace Journal

18 June 2020
Organised by: Logo
ESC Journals

Abstract

AbstractFunding Acknowledgements

Nil

Introduction

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) remains the most common initial ablation strategy for management of atrial fibrillation (AF). The two main methods of creating these lesions include cryo-ablation or radiofrequency ablation (RFA). In both methods, gaps in the encircled lesions have the potential to cause recurrences of AF. The aim of this analysis was to determine whether there is a difference in the number of gap lesions when comparing cryoablation to RFA.

Methods

A retrospective single tertiary centre analysis was performed in 1152 patients who had an AF ablation between January 2015 to June 2019. Patients who required a redo-PVI were included for analysis (n = 155). Demographic (gender, age), clinical (BMI, type of AF, hypertension, DM, left atrial volume) and procedural (PVI method, fluoroscopy time, procedural time) data was collected. For the redo cases, the number of gap lesions by region were analysed by looking at electromechanical maps to determine where the most common gaps occurred for both technologies  

Results

A total of 155 redo procedures (Cryo-RF, n= 46, RF-RF, n = 109) were analysed. There was no statistically significant difference or linear correlation between being obese and number of gaps in the cryo-RF or RF-RF group (R = -0.042, p = 0.351, R = 0.153, p = 0.110 respectively). The total number of gaps in the in the Cryo-RF group = 232 and RF-RF group = 564. There was no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.963). There was no significant difference or correlation between the use of contact force and the number of gaps in the RFA group (p = 0.644, R = -0.045).

Conclusion

Each of these PVI technologies have previously been found to be effective in treating AF. Avoiding gaps  during PVI remains challenging. This retrospective analysis has demonstrated that overall there is no difference in the number of gap lesions that occur after using either of these current ablation technologies.

Cryo-RF vs RF-RF: group comparison

CRYO-RF (n = 46)RF-RF (n = 109)P Value
Male (%)28 (60.1)80 (73)0.197
Age at 2nd procedure (mean +/- SD)61.5 +/- 8.959.8 +/- 11.60.008
Time between procedures (days - mean +/- SD)497.5 +/- 228.21007.7 +/- 924.8<0.001
Obese (%)17 (37)58 (53)0.073
LA volume (ml/m2 - mean +/- SD)59.6 +/- 2357 +/- 260.996
Contact force used in index procedure (%)68 (62)0.644
Total number of gaps2325640.963

Table representing difference between and significance level for Cryo-RF and RF-RF groups.

ESC 365 is supported by