Pool analyses indicated that CB ablation was more beneficial in terms of procedural time [ st and ard mean difference = −0.58 ; 95 % confidence interval ( CI ) , −0.85 to −0.30 ] , complications without phrenic nerve injury ( PNI ) [ odds ratio ( OR ) = 0.79 ; 95 % CI , 0.67–0.93 ; I2 = 16 % ] , and recrudescence ( OR = 0.83 ; 95 % CI , 0.70–0.97 ; I2 = 63 % ) for PAF ; however , the total complications of CB was higher than RF .
The subgroup analysis found that , compared with non-contact force radiofrequency ( non-CF-RF ) , both first-generation cryoballoon ( CB1 ) and second-generation cryoballoon ( CB2 ) ablation  could reduce complications with PNI , procedural time , and recrudescence .
However , the safety and efficacy of CB2 was similar to those of CF-RF .
Conclusion Available overall and subgroup data suggested that both CB1 and CB2 were more beneficial than RF ablation , and the main advantages were reflected in comparing them with non-CF-RF .
However , CF-RF and CB2 showed similar clinical benefits
Purpose The present systematic review and meta- analysis aim ed to assess and compare the safety and efficacy of radiofrequency ( RF ) and cryoballoon ( CB ) ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ( PAF ) .
RF and CB ablation are two frequently used methods for pulmonary vein isolation in PAF , but which is a better choice for PAF remains uncertain .
Radiofrequency catheter ablation versus balloon cryoablation of atrial fibrillation: markers of myocardial damage, inflammation, and thrombogenesis
Summary Background Evidence from animal and human studies suggests that cryoablation might be associated with a lesser inflammatory response and activation of coagulation compared with radiofrequency ablation . The study was aim ed at comparing the effect of cryoballoon and radiofrequency catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation on markers of myocardial damage , inflammation , and activation of coagulation . Methods Forty-one patients received either cryoballoon  ( n = 23 ) or radiofrequency ( n = 18 ) ablation of atrial fibrillation .  We measured troponin I , high-sensitivity CRP , and interleukin 6 at baseline from the cubital vein , and from the right and left atrium before and after ablation , and from the cubital vein the following day . Prothrombin fragments 1 + 2 , soluble P‑selectin , and D‑dimer were measured before and after ablation from both atria . Results We observed higher troponin I release in the cryoballoon than in the radiofrequency group ( 7.01 mcg/l ( interquartile range [ IQR ] : 5.30–9.09 ) vs 2.32 mcg/l ( IQR : 1.45–2.98 ) , p < 0.001 ) . The levels of inflammatory markers ( high-sensitivity CRP and interleukin 6 ) in the two groups were comparable , as were the levels of markers of coagulation activation . Procedure duration , fluoroscopy times , and mid-term success ( 23 months , IQR 7–32 ) of the two groups were also comparable . Conclusions Cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation causes more significant myocardial damage , that is , more extensive ablation lesions , compared with radiofrequency catheter ablation . However , no major differences between these two ablation techniques with regard to the inflammatory response and activation of the coagulation system were observed
Pool analyses indicated that CB ablation was more beneficial in terms of procedural time [ st and ard mean difference = −0.58 ; 95 % confidence interval ( CI ) , −0.85 to −0.30 ] , complications without phrenic nerve injury ( PNI ) [ odds ratio ( OR ) = 0.79 ; 95 % CI , 0.67–0.93 ; I2 = 16 % ] , and recrudescence ( OR = 0.83 ; 95 % CI , 0.70–0.97 ; I2 = 63 % ) for PAF ; however , the total complications of CB was higher than RF .
The subgroup analysis found that , compared with non-contact force radiofrequency ( non-CF-RF ) , both first-generation cryoballoon ( CB1 ) and second-generation cryoballoon ( CB2 ) ablation  could reduce complications with PNI , procedural time , and recrudescence .
However , the safety and efficacy of CB2 was similar to those of CF-RF .
Conclusion Available overall and subgroup data suggested that both CB1 and CB2 were more beneficial than RF ablation , and the main advantages were reflected in comparing them with non-CF-RF .
However , CF-RF and CB2 showed similar clinical benefits
Purpose The present systematic review and meta- analysis aim ed to assess and compare the safety and efficacy of radiofrequency ( RF ) and cryoballoon ( CB ) ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ( PAF ) .
RF and CB ablation are two frequently used methods for pulmonary vein isolation in PAF , but which is a better choice for PAF remains uncertain .