Authors
Virstyuk Yu.V., Shugushev Z.H.
Central Clinical Hospital «RZD-Medicine», Moscow
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most prevalent forms of arrhythmia, affecting approximately 1–2% of the population. Its prevalence is expected to notably increase in the coming decades due to an aging population. AF negatively impacts quality of life and cardiac function, increasing mortality risk. Catheter ablation has become a key method for treating AF, particularly for achieving pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). While traditional radiofrequency ablation remains widespread, recent years have seen increasing attention towards the single-shot cryoballoon ablation technique.
This article provides an analysis of contemporary approaches to the diagnosis and cryoballoon ablation of AF, examining data on the application of new cryoballoon systems. Emphasis is placed on comparing Arctic Front and PolarX technologies, including differences in components and application methods. Various ablation approaches are described, including the direct approach, «hockey stick» method, pull-down, and pull-away techniques, focusing on their clinical efficacy and risk reduction of phrenic nerve injury.
Key differences between cryoablation systems that influence clinical outcomes are investigated. The article concludes on the importance of re-evaluating skills and practices when introducing new technologies, to achieve the highest efficiency and safety in treating AF patients. Further research and continuous professional development are deemed essential for improving treatment outcomes and understanding new catheter ablation technologies.
Keywords: atrial fibrillation, catheter ablation, cryoballoon ablation.
References
1. Kirchhof P, Benussi S, Kotecha D, Ahlsson A, et al. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS. Europace. 2016; 18(11): 1609-1678. doi: 10.1093/europace/euw295.
2. Andrade JG, Wells GA, Deyell MW, Bennett M, et al. EARLY-AF Investigators. Cryoablation or Drug Therapy for Initial Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2021; 384(4): 305-315. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2029980.
3. Wazni OM, Dandamudi G, Sood N, Hoyt R, et al. STOP AF First Trial Investigators. Cryoballoon Ablation as Initial Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2021; 384(4): 316-324. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2029554.
4. Van Belle Y, Janse P, Rivero-Ayerza MJ, Thornton AS, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation using an occluding cryoballoon for circumferential ablation: feasibility, complications, and short-term outcome. Eur Heart J. 2007; 28(18): 2231-7. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm227.
5. Straube F, Dorwarth U, Pongratz J, Brück B, et al. The fourth cryoballoon generation with a shorter tip to facilitate real-time pulmonary vein potential recording: Feasibility and safety results. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019; 30(6): 918-925. doi: 10.1111/jce.13927.
6. Anic A, Lever N, Martin A, Breskovic T, et al. Acute safety, efficacy, and advantages of a novel cryoballoon ablation system for pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: initial clinical experience. Europace. 2021; 23(8): 1237-1243. doi: 10.1093/europace/euab018.
7. Martin CA, Tilz RRR, Anic A, Defaye P, et al. POLAR ICE Investigators. Acute procedural efficacy and safety of a novel cryoballoon for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: Results from the POLAR ICE study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2023; 34(4): 833-840. doi: 10.1111/jce.15861.
8. Tomaiko-Clark E, Bai R, Khokhar M, Su WW. A tale of two balloons: technical and procedural difference between cryoballoon systems. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2022; 37(1): 62-67. doi: 10.1097/HCO.0000000000000942. Erratum in: Curr Opin Cardiol. 2022; 37(2): 191. doi: 10.1097/ 01.hco.0000815460.57636.e9.
9. Honarbakhsh S, Earley MJ, Martin CA, Creta A, et al. PolarX Cryoballoon metrics predicting successful pulmonary vein isolation: targets for ablation of atrial fibrillation. Europace. 2022; 24(9): 1420-1429. doi: 10.1093/ europace/euac100.
10. Andrade JG, Deyell MW, Macle L, Wells GA, et al. EARLY-AF Investigators. Progression of Atrial Fibrillation after Cryoablation or Drug Therapy. N Engl J Med. 2023; 388(2): 105-116. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2212540.
11. Rich ME, Tseng A, Lim HW, Wang PJ, Su WW. Reduction of Iatrogenic Atrial Septal Defects with an Anterior and Inferior Transseptal Puncture Site when Operating the Cryoballoon Ablation Catheter. J Vis Exp. 2015; (100): e52811. doi: 10.3791/52811.
12. Yap SC, Anic A, Breskovic T, Haas A, et al. Comparison of procedural efficacy and biophysical parameters between two competing cryoballoon technologies for pulmonary vein isolation: Insights from an initial multicenter experience. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021; 32(3): 580-587. doi: 10.1111/jce.14915.
13. Andrade JG. Cryoablation for atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm O2. 2020; 1(1): 44-58. doi: 10.1016/j.hroo.2020.02.004.
14. Assaf A, Bhagwandien R, Szili-Torok T, Yap SC. Comparison of procedural efficacy, balloon nadir temperature, and incidence of phrenic nerve palsy between two cryoballoon technologies for pulmonary vein isolation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021; 32(9): 2424-2431. doi: 10.1111/jce.15182.
15. Tilz RR, Meyer-Saraei R, Eitel C, Fink T, et al. Novel Cryoballoon Ablation System for Single Shot Pulmonary Vein Isolation - The Prospective ICE-AGE-X Study. Circ J. 2021; 85(8): 1296-1304. doi: 10.1253/circj. CJ-21-0094.
16. Gang Y, Gonna H, Domenichini G, Sampson M, et al. Evaluation of the Achieve Mapping Catheter in cryoablation for atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized trial. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2016; 45(2): 179-87. doi: 10.1007/s10840-015-0092-3.
17. Martins RP, Hamon D, Césari O, Behaghel A, et al. Safety and efficacy of a second-generation cryoballoon in the ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2014; 11(3): 386-93. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2014.01.002.
