4.1 Review

Quality of life outcomes in cryoablation of atrial fibrillation-A literature review

Journal

PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY
Volume 44, Issue 10, Pages 1756-1768

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/pace.14341

Keywords

atrial fibrillation; cryoablation; outcome; quality of Life; pulmonary vein isolation

Funding

  1. Frans Van de Werf Fund for Clinical Cardiovascular Research
  2. Abbott
  3. Biotronik
  4. Boston Scientific
  5. Medtronic

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cryoballoon ablation for pulmonary vein isolation in atrial fibrillation significantly improves quality of life, with improvement maintained up to 36 months post-ablation. The impact of ablation on quality of life is comparable in paroxysmal and persistent AF patients.
Background Cryoballoon ablation (CRYO) for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in atrial fibrillation (AF) has become an established treatment option as alternative for radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA). As symptom relief is still the main indication for PVI, quality of life (QoL) is a key outcome parameter. This review summarizes the evidence about the evolution of QoL after CRYO. Methods A search for clinical studies reporting QoL outcomes after CRYO was performed on PUBMED and COCHRANE. A total of 506 publications were screened and 10 studies met the in- and exclusion criteria. Results All studies considered QoL as a secondary endpoint and reported significant improvement in QoL between baseline and 12 months follow-up, independent of the QoL instruments used. The effect size of CRYO on QoL was comparable between studies and present in both paroxysmal and persistent AF. Direct comparison between CRYO and RFCA was limited to two studies, there was no difference between ablation modalities after 12 months FU. Two studies in paroxysmal AF reported outcome beyond 12 months follow-up and QoL improvement was maintained up to 36 months after ablation. There were no long-term data available for persistent AF. Conclusion CRYO of AF significantly improves QoL. The scarce amount of data with direct comparison between subgroups limits further exploration. Assessment of QoL should be considered a primary outcome parameter in future trials with long-term follow-up.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available