Pulsed-field vs cryoballoon vs radiofrequency ablation: Outcomes after pulmonary vein isolation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation

Abstract

BackgroundPulsed-field ablation (PFA) has shown promising data in terms of safety and procedural efficiency for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), with similar long-term outcomes compared to radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and cryoballoon ablation (CBA) in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the procedural and long-term outcomes in patients with persistent AF undergoing PVI using PFA, CBA, or RFA. MethodsConsecutive patients with persistent AF undergoing first PVI with PFA, CBA, or RFA were included. Patients underwent 7-day Holter electrocardiography at 3, 6, and 12 months postablation. The primary outcome was recurrence of any atrial arrhythmia after a 90-day blanking period. Safety outcomes included the composite of in-hospital major adverse events. ResultsA total of 533 patients with persistent AF underwent PVI using PFA (n = 214), CBA (n = 190), or RFA (n = 129). Procedures with PFA guided by fluoroscopy were shorter than those with CBA (median 60 minutes; interquartile range [IQR] 53–80 minutes vs 84 minutes; IQR 68–101 minutes; P ≤ .001), and procedures with PFA in combination with 3-dimensional electroanatomic mapping were shorter than those with RFA (median 101 minutes; IQR 85–126 minutes vs 171 minutes; IQR 141–204 minutes; P < .001). Acute safety events occurred in 2.3%, 2.6%, and 0.8% in the PFA, CBA, and RFA groups, respectively (P = .545). The 1-year confounder-adjusted estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmias was 62.1% for CBA, 55.3% for PFA, and 48.3% for RFA (CBA vs PFA: P = .79; CBA vs RFA: P = .009; PFA vs RFA: P = .010). ConclusionIn patients with persistent AF undergoing first PVI, 1-year confounder-adjusted outcomes are better with PFA and CBA than with RFA.