Advantage of POLARx over ARCTIC FRONT ADVANCE PRO during pulmonary vein isolation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

Abstract

Abstract Introduction The electrical pulmonary vein (PV) isolation has been established as a curative therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). Arctic Front™cryoballoon has been used worldwide for AF cryoablation. Recently, a new cryoballoon, POLARxTM CRYOABLATION system have been introduced, of which material of the balloon is softer and the N2O gas flow rate is higher. Purpose The aim was to investigate the procedural parameter and efficacy of POLARx comparing with Arctic Front. Methods This retrospective single center study included 101 consecutive patients who underwent paroxysmal AF ablation using cryoballoon at Keio University hospital from April 2021 to March 2022. The procedural data including the cryoballoon temperature and the number and duration of cryoablation were compared between POLARx (POLARx group) and ARCTIC FRONT ADVANCE PRO (AFA group). After the cryoablation, we added the radiofrequency application in order to maximize the isolated area when the voltage was remained inside PV (Figure 1). The necessities of the additional radiofrequency applications were also compared. Results In the present study, 64 patients in AFA group and 37 patients in POLARx group were analyzed. POLARx group included younger population and less females (62.8±9.9 vs 67.5±9.4 year of age, P=0.02; 13.5 vs 32.8%, P=0.04). There was no significant difference in comorbidities and examination data such as left atrium diameter or brain natriuretic peptide level. The minimal cryoballoon temperatures reached in POLARx group were lower than AFA group (−59.3±6.2 vs −47.7±7.5°C, P<0.01). No difference was found in the total number and duration of cryoablation and the time to isolate PV (6.1±2.1 vs 5.9±1.6, P=0.69; 790.2±256.1 vs 776.1±235.0 sec, P=0.69; 41.8±21.3 vs 47.1±29.6 sec, P=0.44, respectively). With regard to individual PVs, the total number and duration were tended to be larger at right superior PV in POLARx group (1.9±1.1 vs 1.4±0.7, P=0.01; 231.8±123.8 vs 193.2±83.0 sec, P=0.07), while there was no significant difference at the other PVs. The rate of successful PV isolation by a single cryo-application was not different between AFA and POLARx group (54.3 vs 61.4%, P=0.17). The additional radiofrequency applications were more frequent in AFA group (14.8 vs. 4.9%, P=0.003). There was a significant difference at right inferior PV (32.8 vs 8.1%, P=0.01), while not at left superior PV, left inferior PV and right superior PV (9.4 vs 2.9%, P=0.42; 9.4 vs 5.7%, P=0.71; 7.8 vs 2.7%, P=0.41). Phrenic nerve injury was occurred 1 case in both group and esophageal ulcer was occurred in 1 case in AFA group. No other complication including cardiac tamponade was occurred. Conclusion The total number and duration of cryoablation were not significantly different between AFA and POLARx group, except for right superior PV. There was an advantage in largely isolating right inferior PV in POLARx group comparing with AFA group. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.