Abstract:Introduction A hybrid convergent approach (endocardial and epicardial ablation) demonstrated superior effectiveness in a recent randomized study for long‐standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF). Yet, there is a lack of real‐world, long‐term evidence as to which patients are best candidates for a hybrid convergent approach compared to standard endocardial cryoballoon pulmonary vein isolation (CB PVI). Methods and Results This single‐center, retrospective analysis spanning from 2010 to 2015 compared two distinctly different atrial fibrillation (AF) cohorts; one treated with stand‐alone cryoablation and one treated with a hybrid convergent approach. Baseline characteristics described candidates for each approach. The following criteria were utilized to determine CB PVI candidacy: (1) paroxysmal AF (PAF) (stage 3A) with failed class I/III antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) or (2) persistent/LSPAF (stage 3B/3C/3D) with failed class I/III AAD unwilling to undergo hybrid procedure. Selection criteria for the hybrid procedure included: (1) PAF refractory to both class I/III AAD and prior CB PVI (stage 3D) or (2) persistent/LSPAF (stage 3B/3C/3D) with failed class I/III AAD agreeable to hybrid procedure. Prior sternotomy was excluded. Serial electrocardiograms and continuous monitoring evaluated primary efficacy outcome of time‐to‐first recurrence of atrial arrhythmia after a 90‐day blanking period. Secondary outcomes were procedure‐related complications and AAD use (at discharge, 12, and 36 months). Kaplan‐Meier methods evaluated arrhythmia recurrence. Of 276 patients, 197 (64.2 ± 10.6 years old; 66.5% male; 74.1% 3A‐PAF; 18.3% 3B/3D‐persistent AF; 1.0% 3C‐LSPAF; 6.6% undetermined) underwent CB PVI and 79 (61.4 ± 8.1 years old; 83.5% male; 41.8% 3D‐PAF; 45.5% 3B/3D‐persistent AF; 12.7% 3C/3D‐LSPAF) underwent hybrid procedure. Arrhythmia freedom through 36 months was 55.2% for CB PVI and 50.4% for hybrid (p = .32). Class I AAD utilization at discharge occurred in 38 (19.3%) patients in the CB PVI group and 5 (6.3%) patients in the hybrid group (p = .01). CB PVI class I AAD utilization at 12 months occurred in 14 (9.0) patients versus 0 patients for hybrid convergent (p = .004). Patients with one or more adverse event were as follows: two (1.0%) in the CB PVI group (both transient phrenic nerve palsy) and three (3.7%) in the hybrid group (two with significant bleeding and one with wound infection) (p = .14). Conclusion This study demonstrated that patients with more complex forms of AF (3D‐PAF or 3B/3C/3D‐persistent/LSPAF) could be well managed with a convergent approach. In a real‐world evaluation, outcomes match safety and efficacy thresholds achieved for patients with earlier, less complex AF etiologies treated by CB PVI alone.

Real‐world evidence demonstrates an appropriate atrial fibrillation population for hybrid convergent approach versus stand‐alone cryoballoon ablation: A long‐term safety and efficacy study

Pulmonary Vein Isolation with Optimized Linear Ablation Vs Pulmonary Vein Isolation Alone for Persistent AF

Convergent ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation: outcomes from a single-centre real-world experience

Convergent approach to persistent atrial fibrillation ablation: long-term single-centre safety and efficacy

Hybrid-Convergent Procedure or Pulsed Field Ablation in Long-Standing Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

Three-year follow-up of hybrid ablation for atrial fibrillation

Circumferential Pulmonary Vein Isolation Plus Low-Voltage Area Modification in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation symptom reduction and improved quality of life following the hybrid convergent procedure: a CONVERGE trial subanalysis

Contact-force local impedance algorithm to guide effective pulmonary vein isolation in AF patients: 1-year outcome from an international multicenter clinical setting

Outcomes of hybrid surgical ablation and concomitant left atrial appendage exclusion in long‐standing persistent atrial fibrillation

Efficacy of Ablation Index-Guided Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Patients with Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation.

Cryoballoon Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced and Preserved Ejection Fraction.

Long-Term Outcomes after Convergent Procedure for Atrial Fibrillation

Cryoballoon or Radiofrequency Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation Assessed by Continuous Monitoring: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Pulsed Field Versus Cryoballoon Pulmonary Vein Isolation for Atrial Fibrillation: Efficacy, Safety, and Long-Term Follow-Up in a 400-Patient Cohort

Hybrid ablation procedure for the treatment of nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Hybrid Biatrial Ablation Versus Catheter Ablation for Patients With Nonparoxysmal Atrial Fibrillation and Enlarged Left Atrium

The safety and efficacy of hybrid ablation for the treatment of atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis

Pentaspline Pulsed Field Ablation Catheter Versus Cryoballoon for Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: Results From a Prospective Comparative Study

Hybrid ablation for persistent/long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

Randomised clinical trial of cryoballoon versus irrigated radio frequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation—the effect of double short versus standard exposure cryoablation duration during pulmonary vein isolation (CIRCA-DOSE): methods and rationale