A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Direct Comparison of Second-Generation Cryoballoon Ablation and Contact Force-Sensing Radiofrequency Ablation in Patients with Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation

The superiority of second-generation cryoballoon (2G-CB) ablation versus contact force-sensing radiofrequency (CF-RF) ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) was assessed in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATAs) (OR = 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68 to 1.17; p = 0.41), freedom from AF (OR = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.65 to 1.35; p = 0.72), and acute pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) (OR = 1.17; 95% CI = 0.54 to 2.53; p = 0.70) between 2G-CB ablation and CF-RF ablation were not different. The procedure time for the 2G-CB ablation was shorter (MD = -18.78 min; 95% CI = -27.72 to -9.85 min; p < 0.01), while the fluoroscopy time was similar (MD = 2.66 min; 95% CI = -0.52 to 5.83 min; p = 0.10). In the 2G-CB ablation group, phrenic nerve paralysis was more common (OR = 5.74; 95% CI = 1.80 to 18.31; p = < 0.01). Regarding freedom from ATAs, freedom from AF, and acute PVI, these findings imply that 2G-CB ablation is not superior to CF-RF ablation in paroxysmal AF. Although faster than CF-RF ablation, 2G-CB ablation has a greater risk of phrenic nerve paralysis.

Automated summary

This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the superiority of second-generation cryoballoon (2G-CB) ablation with contact force-sensing radiofrequency (CF-RF) ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). The findings showed no significant differences in freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias, freedom from AF, and acute pulmonary vein isolation between the two techniques. However, 2G-CB ablation had a shorter procedure time but a higher risk of phrenic nerve paralysis.