Comparison of cryoballoon and radiofrequency ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background There is limited data comparing radiofrequency (RF) and cryoballoon (CB) ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF), which tends to have higher recurrence rates following ablation compared to paroxysmal AF. Methods A systematic search of the Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane database was performed for studies comparing RF vs CB ablation for persistent AF. An inverse-variance random-effects model was used to calculate the composite effects. Results One randomized and 9 observational studies were identified, with 1650 patients receiving CB and 1706 patients receiving RF ablation. Mean follow-up time ranged from 12 to 48 months. Freedom from recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia was similar with the two modalities (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.08, I 2 0%). Total complications were similar in both groups (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.53, I 2 0%) although rates of phrenic nerve palsy (PNP) were greater with CB (RR 4.13, 95% CI 1.49 to 11.46, I 2 0%). Shorter procedure times were observed with CB (mean reduction 43.77 min, 95% CI 66.45 to 21.09 min, I 2 96%) with no difference in fluoroscopy time (mean difference 0.82 min, 95% CI − 11.92 to 13.55 min, I 2 100%). Conclusions In persistent AF patients, CB ablation has similar efficacy and overall safety as compared to RF ablation. While CB is associated with significantly shorter procedure times, the improved procedural efficiency with CB is offset by increased rates of PNP and the potential need for touch-up RF ablation.