Department of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, PR China.
Clin Cardiol. 2021 Jan;44(1):78-84. doi: 10.1002/clc.23507. Epub 2020 Nov 18.
Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are the most common procedures used to treat refractory atrial fibrillation (AF) and are performed through pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). Studies have shown that CBA can approximately match the therapeutic effects of RFA against AF. However, few studies have investigated the difference between CBA and RFA of the effects on left atrial remodeling for paroxysmal AF.
Atrial remodeling is considered pivotal to the occurrence and development of AF, therefore we sought to assess the influence of atrial remodeling in patients with paroxysmal AF after CBA and RFA in this study.
In this nonrandomized retrospective observational study, we enrolled 328 consecutive patients who underwent CBA or RFA for refractory paroxysmal AF in May 2014 to May 2017 in our hospital. After propensity score matching, 96 patients were included in the CBA group, and 96 were included in the RFA group. Patients were asked to undergo a 12-lead electrocardiogram, a 24-h Holter monitor, and an echocardiogram and to provide their clinical history and symptoms at 6 months and 1, 2, and 3 years postprocedurally. Electrical remodeling of the left atrium was assessed by P wave dispersion (Pdis); structural remodeling was assessed by the left atrium diameter (LAD) and left atrial volume index (LAVI) during scheduled visits.
As of January 2020, compared with baseline, at 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years after ablation, the average changes in Pdis (∆Pdis), LAD (∆LAD), and LAVI (∆LAVI) were significant in both the CBA and RFA groups. Six months after ablation, ∆Pdis, ∆LAD, and ∆LAVI were greater in the CBA group than in the RFA group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in AF/flutter recurrence, but the AF/flutter-free survival time of CBA group may be longer than RFA group after 2 years after ablation. A higher ∆Pdis, ∆LAD, or ∆LAVI at 1 year after ablation may increase AF/flutter-free survival.
Although CBA and RFA are both effective in left atrial electrical and structural reverse-remodeling in paroxysmal AF, CBA may outperform RFA for both purposes 6 months after ablation. However, during long-term follow-up, there was no significant intergroup difference.
冷冻球囊消融术(CBA)和射频消融术(RFA)是治疗难治性心房颤动(AF)最常用的方法,通过肺静脉隔离(PVI)进行。研究表明,CBA 可以与 RFA 对 AF 的治疗效果相媲美。然而,很少有研究探讨 CBA 和 RFA 对阵发性 AF 左心房重构的影响。
心房重构被认为是 AF 发生和发展的关键,因此,我们旨在评估 CBA 和 RFA 对阵发性 AF 患者心房重构的影响。
本研究为非随机回顾性观察性研究,我们纳入了 2014 年 5 月至 2017 年 5 月在我院接受 CBA 或 RFA 治疗难治性阵发性 AF 的 328 例连续患者。经倾向评分匹配后,96 例患者纳入 CBA 组,96 例患者纳入 RFA 组。患者于术后 6 个月、1、2 和 3 年分别进行 12 导联心电图、24 h 动态心电图和超声心动图检查,并提供其临床病史和症状。通过 P 波离散度(Pdis)评估左心房电重构;通过左心房直径(LAD)和左心房容积指数(LAVI)评估左心房结构重构。
截至 2020 年 1 月,与基线相比,在消融后 1 年、2 年和 3 年,CBA 和 RFA 两组患者的 Pdis(∆Pdis)、LAD(∆LAD)和 LAVI(∆LAVI)的平均变化均有统计学意义。消融后 6 个月,CBA 组的 ∆Pdis、∆LAD 和 ∆LAVI 均大于 RFA 组。两组患者的 AF/扑动复发率无统计学差异,但消融后 2 年,CBA 组的 AF/扑动无复发生存时间可能长于 RFA 组。消融后 1 年时,较高的 ∆Pdis、∆LAD 或 ∆LAVI 可能增加 AF/扑动无复发生存。
虽然 CBA 和 RFA 对阵发性 AF 的左心房电重构和结构重构均有疗效,但消融后 6 个月 CBA 可能在这两个方面优于 RFA。然而,在长期随访中,两组之间没有显著的组间差异。