Experimental data suggest that cryoenergy is associated with less endothelial damage and thrombus formation than radiofrequency energy. This study aimed to compare the impact of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) on the endothelial damage, myocardial damage, inflammatory response, and prothrombotic state between the two latest technologies, second-generation cryoballoon (CB2) and contact force-sensing radiofrequency catheter (CFRF) ablation. Eighty-six paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) patients (55 men; 65 ± 12 years) underwent PVI with either the CB2 (n = 64) or CFRF (n = 22). Markers of the endothelial damage (L-arginine/asymmetric dimethylarginine [ADMA]), myocardial injury (creatine kinase-MB [CK-MB], troponin-T, and troponin-I), inflammatory response (high-sensitive C-reactive protein), and prothrombotic state (D-dimer, soluble fibrin monomer complex, and thrombin-antithrombin complex) were determined before and up to 24-h post-procedure. The total application time was shorter (1,460 ± 287 vs. 2,395 ± 571 [sec], p < 0.01) and total procedure time tended to be shorter (199 ± 37 vs. 218 ± 38 [min], p = 0.06) with CB2 than CFRF ablation. The amount of myocardial injury was greater (CK-MB: 45 ± 17 vs. 11 ± 3 [IU/l], p < 0.01) with CB2 than CFRF ablation. The L-arginine/ADMA ratio was lower (160 ± 51 vs. 194 ± 38, p = 0.028) after CB2 than CFRF ablation. Inflammatory and all prothrombotic markers were significantly elevated post-ablation; however, the magnitude was similar between the two groups. During a mean follow-up of 20 ± 6 months, the single-procedure AF freedom was similar between the CB2 and CFRF groups (60/64 vs. 20/22, p = 0.82). CB2-PVI produces significantly lesser endothelial damage with greater myocardial injury than CFRF-PVI; however, similar anticoagulant regimens are required during the peri-procedural periods in both technologies.

Background: The utility of pressure waveform analyses to assess pulmonary vein (PV) occlusions has been reported in cryoballoon PV isolation (CB‐PVI) using first‐generation CBs. This prospective randomized study compared the procedural and clinical outcomes of pressure‐guided and conventional CB‐PVI. Methods and Results: Sixty patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation underwent CB‐PVI with 28‐mm second‐generation CBs. PV occlusions were assessed either by real‐time pressure waveforms without contrast utilization (pressure‐guided group) or contrast injections (conventional group) and randomly assigned. Before the randomization, 24 patients underwent pressure‐guided CB‐PVIs. In the derivation study, a vein occlusion was obtained in 88/96 (91.7%) PVs among which 86 (97.7%) were successfully isolated by the application. In the validation study, the nadir balloon temperature and total freezing time did not significantly differ per PV between the two groups. The positive predictive value of the vein occlusion for predicting successful acute isolations was similar (93 of 103 [90.2%] and 89 of 98 [90.8%] PVs; P = 1.000), but the negative predictive value was significantly higher in pressure‐guided than angiographical occlusions (14 of 17 [82.3%] vs 7 of 22 [31.8%]; P = .003). Both the procedure (57.7 ± 14.2 vs 62.6 ± 15.8 minutes; P = .526) and fluoroscopic times (16.3 ± 6.4 vs 20.1 ± 6.1; P = .732) were similar between the two groups, however, the fluoroscopy dose (130.6 ± 97.7 vs 353.2 ± 231.4 mGy; P < .001) and contrast volume used (0 vs 17.5 ± 7.7 mL; P < .001) were significantly smaller in the pressure‐guided than conventional group. During 27.8 (5‐39) months of follow‐up, the single procedure arrhythmia freedom was similar between the two groups (P = .438). Conclusions: Pressure‐guided second‐generation CB‐PVIs were similarly effective and as safe as conventional CB‐PVIs. This technique required no contrast utilization and significantly reduced radiation exposure more than conventional CB‐PVIs.

No abstract

Background: The oral vasopressin-2 receptor antagonist, tolvaptan, causes aquaresis and improves symptoms in patients with congestive heart failure. However, few studies have explored the effect of tolvaptan in acute heart failure (AHF) patients ≥90 years old. Methods: This study enrolled 106 AHF patients treated with tolvaptan added to standard therapy. The subjects were divided into 2 groups: ≥90-year-old patients (over-90 group, mean 92 ± 2 years, n = 45) and <90-year-old patients (under-90 group, mean 76 ± 11 years, n = 61). Patients’ characteristics were assessed, and efficacy and safety were compared between the 2 groups. Results: The over-90 group had a lower proportion of male patients, lower body weight, and higher ejection fraction. The under-90 group had significantly higher prevalence of ischemic heart disease and diabetes mellitus. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in total urine volume at 24 and 48 hours (1934 ± 983 mL vs 1816 ± 1028 mL, P = 0.58 and 3806 ± 1444 mL vs 4078 ± 1851 mL, P=0.47, respectively), the mean change in body weight (−3.0 ± 2.7 kg vs −2.6 ± 2.6 kg, P = 0.50), improvement of congestive symptoms, changes in serum sodium and creatinine levels, the incidences of hypernatremia (n = 0, 0% vs n = 1, 1.6%, P = 0.63), and worsening renal function (n = 9, 20% vs n = 17, 28%, P = 0.48). Conclusion: The efficacy and safety of tolvaptan in AHF patients aged more than 90 years were comparable to those of <90 years old. Tolvaptan provides a complementary therapeutic option for AHF patients aged more than 90 years.

No abstract