新型Polarx™冷冻消融系统肺静脉隔离的安全性和有效性:与Arctic Front™冷冻球囊在阵发性心房颤动患者中的倾向评分匹配比较

Q3 Medicine
Journal of atrial fibrillation Pub Date : 2021-06-30 eCollection Date: 2021-06-01 DOI:10.4022/jafib.20200455
Joerelle Mojica, Felicia Lipartiti, Maysam Al Housari, Gezim Bala, Shuichiro Kazawa, Vincenzo Miraglia, Cinzia Monaco, Ingrid Overeinder, Antanas Strazdas, Robbert Ramak, Gaetano Paparella, Juan Sieira, Lucio Capulzini, Antonio Sorgente, Erwin Stroker, Pedro Brugada, Carlo De Asmundis, Gian-Battista Chierchia
{"title":"新型Polarx™冷冻消融系统肺静脉隔离的安全性和有效性:与Arctic Front™冷冻球囊在阵发性心房颤动患者中的倾向评分匹配比较","authors":"Joerelle Mojica,&nbsp;Felicia Lipartiti,&nbsp;Maysam Al Housari,&nbsp;Gezim Bala,&nbsp;Shuichiro Kazawa,&nbsp;Vincenzo Miraglia,&nbsp;Cinzia Monaco,&nbsp;Ingrid Overeinder,&nbsp;Antanas Strazdas,&nbsp;Robbert Ramak,&nbsp;Gaetano Paparella,&nbsp;Juan Sieira,&nbsp;Lucio Capulzini,&nbsp;Antonio Sorgente,&nbsp;Erwin Stroker,&nbsp;Pedro Brugada,&nbsp;Carlo De Asmundis,&nbsp;Gian-Battista Chierchia","doi":"10.4022/jafib.20200455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The novel Polarx™ cryoablation system is currently being studied for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. To the best of our knowledge, no study comparing the novel cryoablation system with the standard Arctic Front™ cryoballoon is available in today's literature. This study aims to compare Polarx™ and Arctic Front™ cryoballoon in terms of safety and efficacy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From a total cohort of 202 patients who underwent pulmonary vein (PV) isolation for paroxysmal AF through cryoablation, a population of 30 patients who used Polarx™ were compared with 30 propensity-score matched patients who used Arctic Front™.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pulmonary vein occlusion and electrical isolation were achieved in all (100%) veins with a mean number of 1.09 ± 0.3 occlusion per vein using Polarx™ and 1.19 ± 0.5 occlusion per vein using Arctic Front™ (p = 0.6). Shorter procedure and fluoroscopy time were observed with Polarx™ group (60.5 ± 14.23 vs 73.43 ± 13.26 mins, p = 0.001; 12.83 ± 6.03 vs 17.23 ± 7.17 mins, p = 0.01, respectively). Lower cumulative freeze duration per vein was also observed with Polarx™ (203.38 ± 72.03 vs 224.9 ± 79.35 mins, p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in isolation time between the two groups (34.47 ± 21.23 vs 34.18 ± 26.79 secs, p = 0.9).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The novel Polarx™ cryoablation system showed similar efficacy in vein occlusion and isolation and safety profile when compared to Arctic Front™ cryoablation system. Procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and cumulative freeze duration were significantly lower with Polarx™ cryoablation system.</p>","PeriodicalId":15072,"journal":{"name":"Journal of atrial fibrillation","volume":"14 1","pages":"20200455"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8691321/pdf/jafib-14-20200455.pdf","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Procedural Safety and Efficacy for Pulmonary Vein Isolation with the Novel Polarx™ Cryoablation System: A Propensity Score Matched Comparison with the Arctic Front™ Cryoballoon in the Setting of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation.\",\"authors\":\"Joerelle Mojica,&nbsp;Felicia Lipartiti,&nbsp;Maysam Al Housari,&nbsp;Gezim Bala,&nbsp;Shuichiro Kazawa,&nbsp;Vincenzo Miraglia,&nbsp;Cinzia Monaco,&nbsp;Ingrid Overeinder,&nbsp;Antanas Strazdas,&nbsp;Robbert Ramak,&nbsp;Gaetano Paparella,&nbsp;Juan Sieira,&nbsp;Lucio Capulzini,&nbsp;Antonio Sorgente,&nbsp;Erwin Stroker,&nbsp;Pedro Brugada,&nbsp;Carlo De Asmundis,&nbsp;Gian-Battista Chierchia\",\"doi\":\"10.4022/jafib.20200455\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The novel Polarx™ cryoablation system is currently being studied for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. To the best of our knowledge, no study comparing the novel cryoablation system with the standard Arctic Front™ cryoballoon is available in today's literature. This study aims to compare Polarx™ and Arctic Front™ cryoballoon in terms of safety and efficacy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From a total cohort of 202 patients who underwent pulmonary vein (PV) isolation for paroxysmal AF through cryoablation, a population of 30 patients who used Polarx™ were compared with 30 propensity-score matched patients who used Arctic Front™.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pulmonary vein occlusion and electrical isolation were achieved in all (100%) veins with a mean number of 1.09 ± 0.3 occlusion per vein using Polarx™ and 1.19 ± 0.5 occlusion per vein using Arctic Front™ (p = 0.6). Shorter procedure and fluoroscopy time were observed with Polarx™ group (60.5 ± 14.23 vs 73.43 ± 13.26 mins, p = 0.001; 12.83 ± 6.03 vs 17.23 ± 7.17 mins, p = 0.01, respectively). Lower cumulative freeze duration per vein was also observed with Polarx™ (203.38 ± 72.03 vs 224.9 ± 79.35 mins, p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in isolation time between the two groups (34.47 ± 21.23 vs 34.18 ± 26.79 secs, p = 0.9).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The novel Polarx™ cryoablation system showed similar efficacy in vein occlusion and isolation and safety profile when compared to Arctic Front™ cryoablation system. Procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and cumulative freeze duration were significantly lower with Polarx™ cryoablation system.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of atrial fibrillation\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"20200455\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8691321/pdf/jafib-14-20200455.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of atrial fibrillation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4022/jafib.20200455\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/6/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of atrial fibrillation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4022/jafib.20200455","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

背景:新型的Polarx™冷冻消融系统目前正在研究用于心房颤动(AF)消融。据我们所知,在今天的文献中没有比较新型冷冻消融系统与标准北极锋™冷冻气球的研究。本研究旨在比较Polarx™和Arctic Front™低温气球的安全性和有效性。方法:从202例通过冷冻消融接受肺静脉(PV)隔离治疗阵发性房颤的患者中,将30例使用Polarx™的患者与30例使用Arctic Front™倾向评分匹配的患者进行比较。结果:所有(100%)静脉均实现了肺静脉阻塞和电隔离,使用Polarx™的平均每条静脉阻塞次数为1.09±0.3,使用Arctic Front™的平均每条静脉阻塞次数为1.19±0.5 (p = 0.6)。Polarx™组手术时间和透视时间较短(60.5±14.23分钟vs 73.43±13.26分钟,p = 0.001;(12.83±6.03 vs 17.23±7.17,p = 0.01)。使用Polarx™,每条静脉的累计冻结时间也更短(203.38±72.03 vs 224.9±79.35分钟,p = 0.02)。两组分离时间(34.47±21.23秒vs 34.18±26.79秒,p = 0.9)差异无统计学意义。结论:与Arctic Front冷冻消融系统相比,新型Polarx™冷冻消融系统在静脉闭塞和隔离方面具有相似的疗效和安全性。使用Polarx™冷冻消融系统后,手术时间、透视时间和累积冷冻时间显著降低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Procedural Safety and Efficacy for Pulmonary Vein Isolation with the Novel Polarx™ Cryoablation System: A Propensity Score Matched Comparison with the Arctic Front™ Cryoballoon in the Setting of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation.

Background: The novel Polarx™ cryoablation system is currently being studied for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. To the best of our knowledge, no study comparing the novel cryoablation system with the standard Arctic Front™ cryoballoon is available in today's literature. This study aims to compare Polarx™ and Arctic Front™ cryoballoon in terms of safety and efficacy.

Methods: From a total cohort of 202 patients who underwent pulmonary vein (PV) isolation for paroxysmal AF through cryoablation, a population of 30 patients who used Polarx™ were compared with 30 propensity-score matched patients who used Arctic Front™.

Results: Pulmonary vein occlusion and electrical isolation were achieved in all (100%) veins with a mean number of 1.09 ± 0.3 occlusion per vein using Polarx™ and 1.19 ± 0.5 occlusion per vein using Arctic Front™ (p = 0.6). Shorter procedure and fluoroscopy time were observed with Polarx™ group (60.5 ± 14.23 vs 73.43 ± 13.26 mins, p = 0.001; 12.83 ± 6.03 vs 17.23 ± 7.17 mins, p = 0.01, respectively). Lower cumulative freeze duration per vein was also observed with Polarx™ (203.38 ± 72.03 vs 224.9 ± 79.35 mins, p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in isolation time between the two groups (34.47 ± 21.23 vs 34.18 ± 26.79 secs, p = 0.9).

Conclusions: The novel Polarx™ cryoablation system showed similar efficacy in vein occlusion and isolation and safety profile when compared to Arctic Front™ cryoablation system. Procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and cumulative freeze duration were significantly lower with Polarx™ cryoablation system.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of atrial fibrillation
Journal of atrial fibrillation Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信