Pulmonary vein isolation durability and lesion regression in patients with recurrent arrhythmia after pulsed-field ablation.

BACKGROUND: A novel multipolar pulsed-field ablation (PFA) catheter has recently been introduced for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). Pre-market data showed high rates for PVI-durability during mandatory remapping studies. OBJECTIVE: To present post-market data in patients with recurrent arrhythmias. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing a redo procedure after an index PFA PVI using a bipolar-biphasic PFA system were included. 3-D electro-anatomical maps (3D-EAM) on redo procedure were compared to the 3D-EAM acquired after ablation during the index procedure. PVI durability was assessed on a per-vein and per-patient level and the sites of reconnections were identified. Furthermore, lesion extent around veins with durable isolation was compared to study lesion regression. RESULTS: Of 341 patients treated with a PFA PVI, 29 (8.5%) underwent a left atrial redo ablation due to arrhythmia recurrence. At the end of the index procedure, 110/112 veins (98%, four common ostia) were isolated. On redo procedures performed a median of 6 months after the first ablation, 3D-EAM identified 69/110 (63%) PVs with durable isolation. In 6 (21%) patients, all PVs were durably isolated. Reconnections were more often found on the right-sided veins and on the anterior aspects of the upper veins. Only minor lesion regression was observed between the index and redo procedure (a median of 3 mm (0 - 9.5) on the posterior wall). CONCLUSION: In patients with arrhythmia recurrence after PFA PVI using a first-generation PFA device, durable isolation was observed in 63% of the veins and 21% of the patients showed durable isolation of all previously isolated veins.

Pulsed-field vs. cryoballoon vs. radiofrequency ablation: a propensity score matched comparison of one-year outcomes after pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) has shown favourable data in terms of safety and procedural efficiency for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). We sought to compare procedural and 1-year follow-up data of patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing PVI using PFA, cryoballoon ablation (CBA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). METHODS: Consecutive patients with paroxysmal AF undergoing a first PVI with PFA at our institution were included. For comparison, patients with paroxysmal AF undergoing a first PVI with CBA and RFA were selected using a 1:2:2 propensity score matching. The PFA group followed the standard 32-applications lesion-set protocol, the CBA group a time-to-effect plus 2-min strategy, and the RFA group the CLOSE protocol. Patients were followed with 7d-Holter ECGs 3, 6, and 12 months after ablation. The primary endpoint was recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (ATa) following a blanking period of 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients were included (PFA n = 40; CBA n = 80; RFA n = 80). Median procedure times were shortest with CBA (75 min) followed by PFA (94 min) and RFA (182 min; p < 0.001). Fluoroscopy dose was lowest with RFA (1.6Gycm2) followed by PFA (5.0Gycm2) and CBA (5.7Gycm2; p < 0.001). After a 1-year follow-up, freedom from ATa recurrence was 85.0% with PFA, 66.2% with CBA and 73.8% with RFA (p = 0.12 PFA vs. CBA; p = 0.27 PFA vs. RFA). CONCLUSION: In a propensity score matched analysis of patients with paroxysmal AF, freedom from any ATa 1 year after PVI using PFA was favourable and at least as good as for PVI with CBA or RFA.

Comparison of the PolarX and the Arctic Front cryoballoon for pulmonary vein isolation in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (COMPARE CRYO) - Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Single-shot devices are increasingly used for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in atrial fibrillation (AF). The Arctic Front cryoballoon (Medtronic) is the most frequently used single-shot technology. A recently developed novel cryoballoon has been introduced (PolarX, Boston Scientific) with the aim to address limitations of the Arctic Front system. METHODS: COMPARE CRYO is a multicentre, randomized, controlled trial with blinded endpoint adjudication by an independent clinical events committee. A total of 200 patients with paroxysmal AF undergoing their first PVI are randomized 1:1 between PolarX cryoballoon ablation and Arctic Front cryoballoon ablation. Continuous monitoring during follow-up is performed using an implantable cardiac monitor (ICM) in all patients. The primary endpoint is time to first recurrence of any atrial tachyarrhythmia (AF, atrial flutter, and/or atrial tachycardia) ≥ 120 s between days 91 and 365 post ablation as detected on the (ICM). Procedural safety is assessed by a composite of cardiac tamponade, persistent phrenic nerve palsy >24 h, vascular complications requiring intervention, stroke/transient ischemic attack, atrioesophageal fistula or death occurring during or up to 30 days after the procedure. Key secondary endpoints include (1) procedure and fluoroscopy times, (2) AF burden, (3) proportion of patients with recurrence in the blanking period, (4) proportion of patients undergoing repeat ablation, and (5) quality of life changes at 12 months compared to baseline. CONCLUSION: COMPARE CRYO will compare the efficacy and safety of the novel PolarX cryoballoon and the standard-of-practice Arctic Front cryoballoon for first PVI performed in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal AF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04704986).