Clinical cardiology · 2020
Feasibility, safety, and acute efficacy of the fourth-generation cryoballoon for ablation of atrial fibrillation: Another step forward?
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rottner Laura, Mathew Shibu, Reissmann Bruno, Warneke Laura, Martin Isabell, Lemes Christine, Maurer Tilman, Wohlmuth Peter, Ouyang Feifan, Kuck Karl-Heinz, Metzner Andreas, Rillig Andreas
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The second-generation cryoballoon (CB2) is widely used for pulmonary vein (PV) isolation (PVI) in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). Recently, the novel fourth-generation CB (CB-Advance PRO) was introduced, incorporating a shortened catheter tip.
HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acute efficacy of PVI using the CB-Advance PRO.
METHODS: A total of 200 consecutive patients were analyzed. Hundred patients who underwent PVI due to symptomatic, drug-refractory AF were treated with the CB-Advance PRO (group I) and were included into this multicenter analysis. A group of 100 patients were treated with the CB2 and acted as controls (group II).
RESULTS: In total, 739 of 739 PVs (100%) were successfully isolated. There was a nonsignificant trend in the incidence of online registration of PV signals between both groups (group I: 77.9% vs group II: 71.4%, P = .09). Median time to PVI (time to isolation [TTI]) and mean total freezing time were significantly shorter when using the CB-Advance PRO (group I: 33 [23, 50] vs group II: 40 [26, 60] seconds and group I: 166 ± 29 vs group II: 183 ± 38 seconds, P < .01). In three of 100 (3%) patients of group I and one of 100 (1%) patients of group II, a transient phrenic nerve palsy occurred (P = .62).
CONCLUSION: The use of the novel CB-Advance PRO is feasible and associated with a significant reduction in mean TTI and mean total freezing time as compared to the CB2.
HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acute efficacy of PVI using the CB-Advance PRO.
METHODS: A total of 200 consecutive patients were analyzed. Hundred patients who underwent PVI due to symptomatic, drug-refractory AF were treated with the CB-Advance PRO (group I) and were included into this multicenter analysis. A group of 100 patients were treated with the CB2 and acted as controls (group II).
RESULTS: In total, 739 of 739 PVs (100%) were successfully isolated. There was a nonsignificant trend in the incidence of online registration of PV signals between both groups (group I: 77.9% vs group II: 71.4%, P = .09). Median time to PVI (time to isolation [TTI]) and mean total freezing time were significantly shorter when using the CB-Advance PRO (group I: 33 [23, 50] vs group II: 40 [26, 60] seconds and group I: 166 ± 29 vs group II: 183 ± 38 seconds, P < .01). In three of 100 (3%) patients of group I and one of 100 (1%) patients of group II, a transient phrenic nerve palsy occurred (P = .62).
CONCLUSION: The use of the novel CB-Advance PRO is feasible and associated with a significant reduction in mean TTI and mean total freezing time as compared to the CB2.