Radiofrequency versus Cryoballoon Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: An Evaluation Using ECG, Holter Monitoring, and Implantable Loop Recorders to Monitor Absolute and Clinical Effectiveness.

INTRODUCTION: While several studies have compared the radiofrequency current (RFC) and cryoablation for the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), no study has monitored the long-term outcomes with the usage of implantable loop recorders (ILRs). METHODS: We enrolled 89 consecutive patients with nonvalvular paroxysmal AF (N = 44 for RFC and N = 45 for cryoballoon). The primary efficacy end point was the assessment of effectiveness for each group (RFC versus cryoballoon) when examining freedom from arrhythmia by monitoring with ECG, Holter, and implantable loop recoder (ILR). The primary safety end point compared rates of adverse events between both groups. The secondary efficacy end point examined the duration of the postablation blanking period from ILR retrieved data. RESULTS: The mean age of the study population was 56.6 ± 10.2 years, and the follow-up duration was 12 months. There were no differences in baseline patient characteristics between groups. At 12 months, the absolute effectiveness (measured by ILR) was 65.9% in the RFC group and 51.1% in the cryoballoon group (OR = 1.85; 95% CI: 0.79-4.35; p = 0.157), and the clinical effectiveness (measured by ECG and Holter) was 81.8% in the RFC group and 55.6% in the cryoballoon group (OR = 3.6; 95% CI: 1.37-9.46; p = 0.008). There was no difference in safety between both groups. Asymptomatic episodes were significantly more present in the RFC group as measured by ILRs (p < 0.010). In cryoballoon group, arrhythmia episodes were recorded equally irrespective of the follow-up method (i.e., ECG and Holter versus ILR (p > 0.010)). The blanking period does not seem to be as important in cryoballoon as compared to RFC. CONCLUSION: RFC and cryoballoon ablation had similar absolute effectiveness at 12 months. ECG and Holter were effective when assessing the efficacy of the cryoballoon ablation; however, in the RFC group, ILR was necessary to accurately assess long-term efficacy.

Subclinical arterial wall damage in patients at low to moderate cardiovascular risk.

AIM: The aim of this paper is to study the degree of subclinical arterial wall damage in subjects at low and moderate risk of cardiovascular death by the SCORE scale using instrumental research methods. METHODS: We enrolled 600 patients (mean age 49.0 +/- 7.1 years, 74% women) with a calculated SCORE 5%, who passed a carotid duplex ultrasonography with a measurement of the intima-media thickness (IMT) and carotid plaque (CP) severity. In the study a computer sphygmography was also performed on the subjects to determine ankle-brachial pulse wave velocity (abPWV) and an ankle-brachial index (ABI). RESULTS: We found 389 (64%) patients with subclinical signs of atherosclerosis. CPs were found in 359 patients (60%), thickened IMT in 28 patients (5%), increased abPWV in 227 patients (38%), and ABI of <0.9 in 29 patients (5%). In the patients with a thickened IMT only two had no CPs. In contrast, 92% of the patients with CPs had normal IMT. Increased abPWV was determined in 87% participants with CPs, and only in 30 subjects no CPs were found. All 29 patients with an ABI of less than 0.9 had CPs. The "presence of CP"was the most sensitive parameter in the patients included in the study, in terms of atherosclerosis determination (92%). The identification of individuals with CPs significantly increased in men over 45 years of age (in 68.4% of cases, P = 0.009), and in women over 50 (in 61.8% of cases, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our data reinforces the importance of non-invasive imaging of atherosclerosis in subjects at low and moderate cardiovascular risk. The study demonstrated a high prevalence of subclinical atherosclerosis signs in patients at low to moderate risk by the SCORE scale and a high detection frequency of carotid plaques. This suggests that wider implementation of carotid ultrasound in primary care algorithms may improve risk stratification with timely initiation of preventive strategies.