Balloon technologies for pulmonary vein isolation-12-month outcome and comparison of the novel radiofrequency balloon with the cryoballoon in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

Atrial fibrillation Cryoballoon ablation Heliostar™ Radiofrequency balloon Single shot pulmonary vein isolation

Journal

Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society
ISSN: 1861-0692
Titre abrégé: Clin Res Cardiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101264123

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
13 Mar 2024
Historique:
received: 18 06 2023
accepted: 09 02 2024
medline: 13 3 2024
pubmed: 13 3 2024
entrez: 13 3 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

The cryoballoon (CB) has become a standard tool for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), but the technology is limited in certain ways. A novel RF-balloon (Heliostar™, Biosense Webster, CA, USA) promises the advantages of a balloon technology in combination with 3D mapping. To assess procedural data and outcome, all patients undergoing RF-balloon PVI were included and compared with data from consecutive patients undergoing CB PVI for paroxysmal AF. A total of 254 patients (63 ± 13 years, 54% male) were included: 30 patients undergoing RF-balloon and 224 patients CB PVI. Baseline parameters were comparable. Procedure duration (104.3 ± 35.3 min vs. 69.9 ± 23.1 min; p ≤ 0.001) and fluoroscopy time (16.3 ± 7.1 min vs. 11.6 ± 4.9 min; p ≤ 0.001) were longer using the RF-balloon; ablation time (43.5 ± 17.9 vs. 36.4 ± 15.6; p = 0.08) did not differ, and time-to-isolation (TTI) was shorter (18.2 ± 7.0 s vs. 62.8 ± 35.1 s; p ≤ 0.001). Second-generation RF-balloon cases showed shorter ablation time and TTI at comparable procedure duration and fluoroscopy time. One pericardial effusion occurred with the RF-balloon due to complicated transseptal access. During CB PVI in 4/224 patients (1.8%), a phrenic nerve palsy was observed. After 12 months, 78% of patients after RF-balloon and 81% of patients after CB PVI (p = 0.5) were free from atrial arrhythmias. The RF-balloon was safe and effective. Compared with the CB, TTI was shorter, but procedure durations and fluoroscopy times were longer. This can be attributed to a learning curve and the initial necessity for separate 3D map preparation. Considering the results with the second-generation RF-balloon, more experience is needed to determine the potential benefits.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The cryoballoon (CB) has become a standard tool for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), but the technology is limited in certain ways. A novel RF-balloon (Heliostar™, Biosense Webster, CA, USA) promises the advantages of a balloon technology in combination with 3D mapping.
METHODS METHODS
To assess procedural data and outcome, all patients undergoing RF-balloon PVI were included and compared with data from consecutive patients undergoing CB PVI for paroxysmal AF.
RESULTS RESULTS
A total of 254 patients (63 ± 13 years, 54% male) were included: 30 patients undergoing RF-balloon and 224 patients CB PVI. Baseline parameters were comparable. Procedure duration (104.3 ± 35.3 min vs. 69.9 ± 23.1 min; p ≤ 0.001) and fluoroscopy time (16.3 ± 7.1 min vs. 11.6 ± 4.9 min; p ≤ 0.001) were longer using the RF-balloon; ablation time (43.5 ± 17.9 vs. 36.4 ± 15.6; p = 0.08) did not differ, and time-to-isolation (TTI) was shorter (18.2 ± 7.0 s vs. 62.8 ± 35.1 s; p ≤ 0.001). Second-generation RF-balloon cases showed shorter ablation time and TTI at comparable procedure duration and fluoroscopy time. One pericardial effusion occurred with the RF-balloon due to complicated transseptal access. During CB PVI in 4/224 patients (1.8%), a phrenic nerve palsy was observed. After 12 months, 78% of patients after RF-balloon and 81% of patients after CB PVI (p = 0.5) were free from atrial arrhythmias.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
The RF-balloon was safe and effective. Compared with the CB, TTI was shorter, but procedure durations and fluoroscopy times were longer. This can be attributed to a learning curve and the initial necessity for separate 3D map preparation. Considering the results with the second-generation RF-balloon, more experience is needed to determine the potential benefits.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38478088
doi: 10.1007/s00392-024-02401-w
pii: 10.1007/s00392-024-02401-w
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, Arbelo E, Bax JJ, Blomström-Lundqvist C et al (2020) ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J 2020:1–126
Andrade JG, Wells GA, Deyell MW, Bennett M, Essebag V, Champagne J et al (2021) Cryoablation or drug therapy for initial treatment of atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 384:305–315
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2029980 pubmed: 33197159
Wazni OM, Dandamudi G, Sood N, Hoyt R, Tyler J, Durrani S et al (2021) Cryoballoon ablation as initial therapy for atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 384:316–324
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2029554 pubmed: 33197158
Kuck KH, Brugada J, Fürnkranz A, Metzner A, Ouyang F, Chun J et al (2016) Cryoballoon or radiofrequency ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 374:2235–2245
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1602014 pubmed: 27042964
Fortuni F, Casula M, Sanzo A, Angelini F, Cornara S, Somaschini A et al (2020) Meta-analysis comparing cryoballoon versus radiofrequency as first ablation procedure for atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 125:1170–1179
doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.01.016 pubmed: 32087997
Dhillon GS, Honarbakhsh S, Di Monaco A, Coling AE, Lenka K, Pizzamiglio F et al (2020) Use of a multi-electrode radiofrequency balloon catheter to achieve pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: 12-month outcomes of the RADIANCE study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 31:1259–1269
doi: 10.1111/jce.14476 pubmed: 32250514
Schilling R, Dhillon GS, Tondo C, Riva S, Grimaldi M, Quadrini F et al (2021) Safety, effectiveness, and quality of life following pulmonary vein isolation with a multi-electrode radiofrequency balloon catheter in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: 1-year outcomes from SHINE. Europace 23:851–860
doi: 10.1093/europace/euaa382 pubmed: 33450010 pmcid: 8186540
Kanthasamy V, Breitenstein A, Schilling R, Hofer D, Tiongco B, Ang R et al (2023) Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation with a multi-electrode radiofrequency balloon; first and early two centre experience in Europe. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 34(6):1350–1359
doi: 10.1111/jce.15799 pubmed: 36598422
Del Monte A, Almorad A, Pannone L, Della Rocca DG, Bisignani A, Monaco C et al (2023) Pulmonary vein isolation with the radiofrequency balloon catheter: a single centre prospective study. Europace 25:896–904 
Almorad A, Chierchia GB, Pannone L, Osorio TG, Sorgente A, Bisignani A et al (2022) The optimized clinical workflow for pulmonary vein isolation with the radiofrequency balloon. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 64:531–538
doi: 10.1007/s10840-021-01094-9 pubmed: 34791605
Scheurlen C, van den Bruck JH, Filipovic K, Wörmann J, Arica Z, Erlhöfer S et al (2022) Procedural and outcome impact of obesity in cryoballoon versus radiofrequency pulmonary vein isolation in atrial fibrillation patients. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 65:403–410
doi: 10.1007/s10840-022-01210-3 pubmed: 35415815 pmcid: 9640436
Andrade JG, Champagne J, Dubuc M, Deyell MW, Verma A, Macle L et al (2019) Cryoballoon or radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation assessed by continuous monitoring: a randomized clinical trial. Circulation 140:1779–1788
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.042622 pubmed: 31630538

Auteurs

Jan-Hendrik van den Bruck (JH)

Department of Electrophysiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany. Jan-Hendrik.van-den-bruck@uk-koeln.de.

Jonas Wörmann (J)

Department of Electrophysiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.

Arian Sultan (A)

Department of Electrophysiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.

Karlo Filipovic (K)

Department of Electrophysiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.

Katharina Seuthe (K)

Department of Electrophysiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.

Susanne Erlhöfer (S)

Department of Electrophysiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.

Cornelia Scheurlen (C)

Department of Electrophysiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.

Sebastian Dittrich (S)

Department of Electrophysiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.

Jan-Hendrik Schipper (JH)

Department of Electrophysiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.

Jakob Lüker (J)

Department of Electrophysiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.

Daniel Steven (D)

Department of Electrophysiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.

Classifications MeSH