No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
[Comparison of cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation for treating atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia]
Abstract
To compare the efficacy and safety between cryoablation (Cryo) and radiofrequency (RF) ablation for treating patients with atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT).
Patients with AVNRT (n = 304) were divided into Cryo group (n = 67) and RF group (n = 237). The procedure success rate, complete slow pathway block rate, atrioventricular block rate and relapse rate were compared between two groups.
There was no statistically difference between 2 groups in the success rate (Cryo group 98.5% vs RF group 97.0%, P = 0.820), complete slow pathway block rate (Cryo group 98.5% vs RF group 91.6%, P = 0.088), atrioventricular block rate (Cryo group 0 vs RF group 2.5%, P = 0.413), relapse rate (Cryo group 0 vs RF group 1.7%, P = 0.643). But Cryo group had more advantage than RF group.
Efficacy and safety were comparable between cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation for treating patients with AVNRT.
Purpose of review:
Atrioventricular node reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) is the most common mechanism of supraventricular tachycardia. Radiofrequency ablation has been the most prevalent method for slow pathway ablation but carries risk of atrioventricular node injury. Focal cryoablation has been utilized as an alternative ablation modality; however, there has been concern about decreased efficacy, resulting in a higher rate of recurrence postablation. We also report outcomes from two international centers using an 8-mm cryocatheter and complete a thorough comparison of existing data on ablation of AVNRT.
Recent findings:
Previous reviews included studies from 2006 onward. These studies included use of the 4 mm focal cryocatheter, which has largely been abandoned in current adult practice. We will cite more contemporary studies within the past 10 years, which also includes use of the 6 and 8 mm cryocatheter.
Summary:
The use of focal cryoablation allows for reversible injury during AVNRT ablation, providing safety from permanent atrioventricular node injury. With the appropriate ablation endpoints, 8 mm focal cryoablation is more effective for permanent lesion formation, leading to lower recurrences.
Ablation of the slow pathway is an established cure for atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT). Periprocedural damage to the conduction system is a major concern during AVNRT ablation, and cryoablation (CRYO) has been suggested to improve the procedural safety compared to standard radiofrequency (RF) ablation, without reducing the procedural success.
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing CRYO with RF ablation of AVNRT.
We searched PubMed, CENTRAL, the BioMed Central, EMBASE, CardioSource, clinicaltrials.gov, and ISI Web of Science (January 1980 to July 2013). No language restriction was applied. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts to identify studies that compared the procedural outcomes of AVNRT ablation with either CRYO or RF energy. Two independent reviewers assessed the risk of bias according to the Cochrane Collaboration, and extracted patient, study characteristics, and procedural outcome data. Results are expressed as odds ratio (OR) or as weighted mean difference (WMD) with their 95 % confidence interval (CI).
Fourteen studies (5 prospective randomized and 9 observational) with 2,340 patients (mean age range 13 to 53 years, 1,522 (65 %) females) were included in the analysis. RF ablation was performed in 1,262 (54 %) patients, while CRYO in 1,078 (46 %) patients. Acute success (abolition of dual atrioventricular node physiology or single echo beats) was achieved in 88 % of patients treated with RF versus 83 % of those treated with CRYO (OR = 0.72, 95 % CI 0.46 to 1.13; P = 0.157). RF ablation was associated with shorter total procedure time (WMD = -13.7 min, 95 % CI -23 to -4.3 min; P = 0.004), but slightly longer fluoroscopy time (WMD = +4.6 min 95 % CI +1.7 to +7.6 min; P = 0.002). Permanent atrioventricular block occurred in 0.87 % RF cases and in no CRYO case (OR = 3.60, 95 % CI 1.09 to 11.81; P = 0.035). Over a median follow-up of 10.5 months (range 6 to 12 months), freedom from recurrent AVNRT was 96.5 % in the RF group versus 90.9 % in the CRYO group (OR = 0.40, 95 % CI 0.28 to 0.58; P < 0.001). At meta-regression analysis, no clinical or procedural variable had a significant interaction with the results above.
In patients undergoing AVNRT ablation, RF significantly reduces the risk of long-term arrhythmia recurrence compared to CRYO, but is associated with a higher risk of permanent atrioventricular block.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.