Cryoballoon versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-analysis of 16 Clinical Trials.
Introduction: We aimed to study the procedural characteristics, efficacy and safety of cryoballoon ablation (CBA) versus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to clinical trials comparing CBA and RFA for AF. Outcomes were evaluated for efficacy, procedure characteristics and safety. For each study, odd ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for endpoints for both approaches. Results: We analyzed a total of 9,957 participants (3,369 in the CBA and 6,588 in RFA group) enrolled in 16 clinical trials. No significant difference was observed between CBA and RFA with regards to freedom from atrial arrhythmia at 12-months, recurrent atrial arrhythmias or repeat catheter ablation. CBA group had a significantly higher transient phrenic nerve injury (OR 14.19, 95% CI: 6.92-29.10; p
Published In/Presented At
Garg, J., Chaudhary, R., Palaniswamy, C., Shah, N., Krishnamoorthy, P., Bozorgnia, B., & Natale, A. (2016). Cryoballoon versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-analysis of 16 Clinical Trials. Journal Of Atrial Fibrillation, 9(3), 1429. doi:10.4022/jafib.1429
Cardiology | Medical Sciences | Medicine and Health Sciences
Department of Medicine, Department of Medicine Faculty