RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation is an effective treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). Cryoballoon ablation using the Arctic Front cryoballoon (Medtronic) was found to be superior to antiarrhythmic drug treatment. Recently, a novel cryoballoon system was introduced (PolarX, Boston Scientific). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of the 2 cryoballoons in a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic paroxysmal AF were enrolled in 2 centers and randomized 1:1 to pulmonary vein isolation using the PolarX or the Arctic Front cryoballoon. All patients received an implantable cardiac monitor. The primary endpoint was first recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AF, atrial flutter, or atrial tachycardia [AT]) between days 91 and 365. Procedural safety was assessed by a composite of tamponade, phrenic nerve palsy lasting >24 hours, vascular complications, stroke/transient ischemic attack, atrioesophageal fistula or death up to 30 days. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were enrolled. At 1 year, recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia had occurred in 41 of 99 patients (41.6%) assigned to the PolarX group and in 48 of 102 patients (47.1%) assigned to the Arctic Front group (HR: 0.85 [95% CI: 0.56-1.30]; P = 0.03 for noninferiority; P = 0.46 for superiority). The safety endpoint occurred in 5 patients (5%) in the PolarX group (n = 5 phrenic nerve palsies lasting >24 hours), whereas no safety endpoints occurred in the Arctic Front group (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized controlled trial using implantable cardiac monitors for continuous rhythm monitoring, the novel PolarX cryoballoon was noninferior compared with the Arctic Front cryoballoon regarding efficacy. However, the PolarX balloon resulted in significantly more phrenic nerve palsies. (Comparison of PolarX and the Arctic Front Cryoballoons for PVI in Patients With Symptomatic Paroxysmal AF [COMPARE-CRYO]; NCT04704986).
RESUMEN
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).