Impact of cryoballoon application abortion due to phrenic nerve injury on reconnection rates: a YETI subgroup analysis.

Cryoballoon (CB)-based pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is an effective treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). The most frequent complication during CB-based PVI is right-sided phrenic nerve injury (PNI) which is leading to premature abortion of the freeze cycle. Here, we analysed reconnection rates after CB-based PVI and PNI in a large-scale population during repeat procedures. In the YETI registry, a total of 17 356 patients underwent CB-based PVI in 33 centres, and 731 (4.2%) patients experienced PNI. A total of 111/731 (15.2%) patients received a repeat procedure for treatment of recurrent AF. In 94/111 (84.7%) patients data on repeat procedures were available. A total of 89/94 (94.7%) index pulmonary veins (PVs) have been isolated during the initial PVI. During repeat procedures, 22 (24.7%) of initially isolated index PVs showed reconnection. The use of a double stop technique did non influence the PV reconnection rate (P = 0.464). The time to PNI was 140.5 ± 45.1 s in patients with persistent PVI and 133.5 ± 53.8 s in patients with reconnection (P = 0.559). No differences were noted between the two populations in terms of CB temperature at the time of PNI (P = 0.362). The only parameter associated with isolation durability was CB temperature after 30 s of freezing. The PV reconnection did not influence the time to AF recurrence. In patients with cryoballon application abortion due to PNI, a high rate of persistent PVI rate was found at repeat procedures. Our data may help to identify the optimal dosing protocol in CB-based PVI procedures. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03645577?term=YETI&cntry=DE&draw=2&rank=1 ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03645577.

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of interest: C.H.H. received travel grants and research grants from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Biosense Webster and Cardiofocus and is a proctor and lecturer of Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Cardiofocus and Biosense Webster. K.H.K. received travel grants and research grants from Biosense Webster, Stereotaxis, Prorhythm, Medtronic, Edwards, Cryocath, and is a consultant to St. Jude Medical, Biosense Webster, Prorhythm, and Stereotaxis. He received speaker's honoraria from Medtronic. R.R.T. received travel grants from St. Jude Medical, Biosense Webster, Daiichi Sankyo, SentreHeart and Speaker’s Bureau Honoraria from Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston scientific, Pfizer, Topera, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bayer, Sanofi Aventis, and research grants by Cardiofocus, Boston Scientific and Lifetech. K.A. is a proctor and lecturer for Medtronic, Biosense Webster, and Abbott. A.M. received speaker's honoraria and travel grants from Medtronic, Biosense Webster and Cardiofocus. F.S. received honoraria for lectures from Medtronic, Philips EPD Solutions, and Bristol-Myers-Squibb, outside the submitted work; and educational support from Pfizer. S.C. received travel grants and speaker’s honoraria from Medtronic, Biosense Webster and Abbott, and is a proctor of Medtronic. E.J.P. received consultant fees from Medtronic, Biotronik, Abbott, Boston Scientific. E.W. is a consultant to Medtronic. All other authors have no relevant disclosures.