Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a growing health burden, and pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using cryoballoon (CB) or radiofrequency (RF) represents an attractive therapeutic option. Sex-specific differences in the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and clinical presentation of AF and PVI are recognized. Objective: We aimed at comparing the efficacy, safety, and procedural characteristics of CB and RF in women and men undergoing a first PVI procedure. Methods: We searched for randomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies comparing CB and RF ablation with at least 1 year of follow-up. After merging individual patient data from 18 data sets, we investigated the sex-specific (procedure failure defined as recurrence of atrial arrhythmia, reablation, and reinitiation of antiarrhythmic medication), safety (periprocedural complications), and procedural characteristics of CB vs RF using Kaplan-Meier and multilevel models. Results: From the 18 studies, 4840 men and 1979 women were analyzed. An analysis stratified by sex correcting for several covariates showed a better efficacy of CB in men (hazard ratio for recurrence 0.88; 95% confidence interval 0.78–0.98, P =.02) but not in women (hazard ratio 0.98; 95% confidence interval 0.83–1.16; P =.82). For women and men, the energy source had no influence on the occurrence of at least 1 complication. For both sexes, the procedure time was significantly shorter with CB (−22.5 minutes for women and −27.1 minutes for men). Conclusion: CB is associated with less long-term failures in men. A better understanding of AF-causal sex-specific mechanisms and refinements in CB technologies could lead to higher success rates in women.

Sex-specific efficacy and safety of cryoballoon versus radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: An individual patient data meta-analysis

Anselmino M.;
2020-01-01

Abstract

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a growing health burden, and pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using cryoballoon (CB) or radiofrequency (RF) represents an attractive therapeutic option. Sex-specific differences in the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and clinical presentation of AF and PVI are recognized. Objective: We aimed at comparing the efficacy, safety, and procedural characteristics of CB and RF in women and men undergoing a first PVI procedure. Methods: We searched for randomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies comparing CB and RF ablation with at least 1 year of follow-up. After merging individual patient data from 18 data sets, we investigated the sex-specific (procedure failure defined as recurrence of atrial arrhythmia, reablation, and reinitiation of antiarrhythmic medication), safety (periprocedural complications), and procedural characteristics of CB vs RF using Kaplan-Meier and multilevel models. Results: From the 18 studies, 4840 men and 1979 women were analyzed. An analysis stratified by sex correcting for several covariates showed a better efficacy of CB in men (hazard ratio for recurrence 0.88; 95% confidence interval 0.78–0.98, P =.02) but not in women (hazard ratio 0.98; 95% confidence interval 0.83–1.16; P =.82). For women and men, the energy source had no influence on the occurrence of at least 1 complication. For both sexes, the procedure time was significantly shorter with CB (−22.5 minutes for women and −27.1 minutes for men). Conclusion: CB is associated with less long-term failures in men. A better understanding of AF-causal sex-specific mechanisms and refinements in CB technologies could lead to higher success rates in women.
2020
17
8
1232
1240
Ablation; Atrial fibrillation; Cryoballoon; Radiofrequency; Sex-specific; Women
du Fay de Lavallaz J.; Badertscher P.; Kobori A.; Kuck K.-H.; Brugada J.; Boveda S.; Providencia R.; Khoueiry Z.; Luik A.; Squara F.; Kosmidou I.; Davtyan K.V.; Elvan A.; Perez-Castellano N.; Hunter R.J.; Schilling R.; Knecht S.; Kojodjojo P.; Wasserlauf J.; Oral H.; Matta M.; Jain S.; Anselmino M.; Kuhne M.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/1769822
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 2
  • Scopus 12
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 11
social impact