This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.

CRYOTIP

Comparison of Radiofrequency Ablation vs. Cryoablation in Atrial Flutter

Issue: January 2010

Add topic to email alerts

Receive an email when new articles are posted on

Please provide your email address to receive an email when new articles are posted on .

Subscribe

Added to email alerts

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

Back to Healio

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Back to Healio

Trial compared persistence of bidirectional conduction block in the cavotricuspid isthmus after radiofrequency ablation vs. cryoablation.

Design: randomized, prospective
Patients: 181
Centers: 10
Countries: Germany

RESULTS: Invasive electrophysiologic follow-up was performed at three months in 60 patients in the radiofrequency group and 64 patients in the cryoablation group. The primary study endpoint was achieved in nine of 60 patients (15%) in the radiofrequency ablation group vs. 22 of 64 patients (34.4%) in the cryoablation group (P=.014). The researchers reported bidirectional conduction block in 85% of patients treated with radiofrequency ablation vs. 65.6% of patients treated with cryoablation. Patients in the cryoablation group had a lower perception of pain during ablation vs. those in the radiofrequency ablation group (P<.001).

Published in: Heart Rhythm. 2009;6:1699-1705.

Click here to read more about the CRYOTIP trial.