Pulsed Field Ablation vs Cryoablation In Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation

Brief summary (registry, in English)

Cryoballoon pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has emerged as an alternative to radiofrequency in the treatment of drug-resistant atrial fibrillation (AF). (1) Cryoablation offers potential advantages over radiofrequency, including shorter procedure times, decreased fluoroscopy time, shorter hospital length of stay, and different rates and types of complications. (2) The efficacy over a mean follow-up of one year with cryoablation for AF is comparable to that of radiofrequency ablation in a prospective randomized trial, with a lower major complication rate (3, 4). In recent years, AF cryoablation has established itself as a real alternative to RF ablation, to the point that this ablative source is chosen in one out of five European patients undergoing PV isolation. 70-80% of patients maintain sinus rhythm after a first procedure, showing an efficacy rate equivalent to ablation by RF. It is also comparable to RF when it comes to safety. Phrenic nerve palsy remains the major concern of cryoablation, accounting for 40% of periprocedural complications. A reduction in total procedure time and less dependence on the operator's experience make cryoablation an attractive choice for centres starting an AF ablation program. In conclusion, we do not yet have definitive data to affirm the superiority of one energy source over the other. Generally the choice depends on the availability of the centre and on the experience of the operator. Pulse field ablation (PFA): Vivek Y. Reddy demonstrates that in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, PFA rapidly and efficiently isolates PVs with a degree of tissue selectivity and a safety profile(1).PFA can achieve a high degree of durable PV isolation with a comparable efficiency than another techniques (RF or CRYO) at one year follow-up (2) Cryoablation has been a recognised technique for the ablation of atrial fibrillation for many years, with many studies comparing the technique to radiofrequency ablation with equal results. Studies are underway to compare radiofrequency AF ablation versus PFA (BEAT-AF study). A randomized study to compare two methods of cryoablation versus PFA will be necessary to validate the non-inferiority of the technique.

What you commit to

• Study type: Interventional
• Participants enrolled: 354
• From 25 Sept 2023 to the primary completion date, 23 Mar 2026
• 7 sites in 1 country
• Visits and tests: ask the trial team, the registry does not list them

Built from the registry fields of ClinicalTrials.gov. It describes the study, not your situation.

Who cannot take part

Copied verbatim from ClinicalTrials.gov and grouped by topic. Only the trial team decides who can take part.

Who the study is looking for

Age in the registry: 18 years to - · Sex: All · Does not accept healthy volunteers

Full criteria on ClinicalTrials.gov

Sites (7)

Sites in registry order. Pick your city on the disease page to sort them by distance.