VP122 Cryoballoon Versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation

Gongru Wang,Yingyao Chen,Lizheng Shi,Danni Chen,Hui Sun
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462317003750
2017-01-01
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Abstract:INTRODUCTION:Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is a new effective treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) (1). The standard of care for ablation methods using radiofrequency (RF) is time-consuming and technically challenging (2), and restricted to a few specialized centers, which causes the limited availability of ablation therapy (3). Therefore, cryoballoon (CB) ablation has been developed to shorten and simplify the procedure. The objective of this systematic literature review and meta-analysis was to compare the effectiveness of cryoballoon ablation (CBA) with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for the treatment of AF.METHODS:We searched the Cochrane Library and PubMed from 2009 to October 2016 to screen the eligible literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The effectiveness measures were the acute pulmonary vein (PV) isolation rate, procedure time, complications and the proportion of patients free from AF (follow-up > 3 months). Meta-analysis and descriptive statistics were used in this study.RESULTS:A total of seventeen articles with 5,806 cases (2,288 from CBA group, 3,518 from RFA group) from seven different countries were reviewed and analyzed. Pooled analyses indicated that CBA was more beneficial in terms of procedural time (Standard mean difference, SMD = -.501; 95%CI: -.893– -.109; PIn the four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the seventeen studies, the proportion of patients free from AF (OR = .951; 95 percent CI:.752–1.202; P = .672) and the complications (OR = 1.521; 95 percent CI:.570–4.058; P = .402) were not significantly different between CBA and RFA.CONCLUSIONS:Overall, compared with RFA for the treatment of patients with AF, CBA had similar clinical effectiveness on the proportion of people free from AF and the number of complications, and yet greater improvement in total procedure time referred for CBA and higher acute PVI rate referred for RFA.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?