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 radiofrequency for pulmonary vein re-isolation after a failed initial ablation procedure in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
AIM Catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ( PAF ) is associated with an important risk of early and late recurrence , necessitating repeat ablation procedures . The aim of this prospect i ve r and omized patient-blind study was to compare the efficacy and safety of cryoballoon ( Cryo ) versus radiofrequency ( RF ) ablation of PAF after failed initial RF ablation procedure . METHODS Patients with a history of symptomatic PAF after a previous failed first RF ablation procedure were eligible for this study . Patients were r and omized to Cryo or RF redo ablation . The primary endpoint of the study was recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia , including AF and left atrial flutter/tachycardia , after a second ablation procedure at 1 year of follow-up . All patients were implanted with a cardiac monitor ( Reveal XT , Medtronic ) to continuously track the cardiac rhythm . Patients with an AF burden ( AF% ) ≤ 0.5 % were considered AF-free ( Responders ) , while those with an AF% > 0.5 % were classified as patients with AF recurrences ( non-Responders ) . RESULTS Eighty patients with AF recurrences after a first RF pulmonary vein isolation ( PVI ) were r and omized to Cryo ( N = 40 ) or to RF ( N = 40 ) . Electrical potentials were recorded in 77 mapped PVs ( 1.9 ± 0.8 per patient ) in Cryo Group and 72 PVs ( 1.7 ± 0.8 per patient ) in RF Group ( P = 0.62 ) , all of which were targeted . In Cryo group , 68 ( 88 % ) of the 77 PVs were re-isolated using only Cryo technique ; the remaining 9 PVs were re-isolated using RF . In RF group , all 72 PVs were successfully re-isolated ( P = 0.003 vs Cryo ) . By intention-to-treat , 23 ( 58 % ) RF patients were AF-free vs 17 ( 43 % ) Cryo patients on no antiarrhythmic drugs at 1 year ( P = 0.06 ) . Three patients had temporary phrenic nerve paralysis in the Cryo group ; the RF group had no complications . Of the 29 patients who had only Cryo PVI without any RF ablation , 11 ( 38 % ) were AF-free vs 20 ( 59 % ) of the 34 patients who had RF only ( P = 0.021 ) . CONCLUSION When patients require a redo pulmonary vein isolation ablation procedure for recurrent PAF , RF appears to be the preferred energy source relative to Cryo
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 .