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 .
Cryoballoon Versus Open Irrigated Radiofrequency Ablation in Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation
Background — There is a lack of data on the comparative efficacy and procedural safety of open irrigated radiofrequency ( RF ) and cryoballoon catheter ( CB ) ablation for pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation . Methods and Results — In a prospect i ve , noninferiority study , 315 patients were r and omly assigned to RF ( n=159 ) or CB ( n=156 ) ablation . The primary end point was freedom from atrial arrhythmia with absence of persistent complications . Patients were largely comparable between groups with more vascular disease in the RF group ( 8.2 % versus 2.6 % for CB ; P=0.028 ) . The primary end point at 12 months was achieved by 70.7 % with RF and 73.6 % with CB ( multiple procedure success ) , including 31 redo procedures in each group ( 19.5 % of RF versus 19.9 % of CB ; P=0.933 ) . For the intention-to-treat population , noninferiority of CB was revealed for the predefined inferiority margin ( risk difference , 0.029 ; 95 % confidence interval , −0.074 to 0.132 ; P<0.001 ) . Rates at 6 months were 63.1 % and 64.1 % for the RF and CB groups ( single procedure success ) , and noninferiority was confirmed ( risk difference , 0.010 ; 95 % confidence interval , −0.097 to 0.116 ; P=0.002 ) . Periprocedural complications for the index procedure were more frequent in the CB group ( 5.0 % RF , 12.2 % CB ; P=0.022 ) with a significant difference in phrenic nerve palsies ( 0 % RF , 5.8 % CB ; P=0.002 ) . Conclusion — This large , prospect i ve , r and omized , controlled study demonstrates noninferiority of CB ablation versus RF ablation for treating patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation . Clinical Trial Registration — URL : http://www . clinical trials.gov . Unique identifier : NCT00774566
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 .