| Objectives: Currently radiofrequency and cryoballoon ablations are the two standard ablation systems used for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation;however,there is no universal consensus on which ablation is the optimal choice.We therefore sought to undertake a meta-analysis with special emphases on comparing the efficacy and safety between cryoballoon and radiofrequency ablations by synthesizing published clinical trials.Methods:Articles were identified by searching the MEDLINE,EMBASE,CNKI and Wanfang databases by the end of May 2016 comparing cryoballoon ablation and radiofrequency ablation for randomized controlled trials(RCTs)about the effectiveness and safety ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation,by reviewing the bibliographies of eligible reports,and by consulting with experts in this field.The quality was evaluated.The data were extracted and meta-analyses were performed by using RevMan 5.3software..Results: A total of 6 studies have been included,all clinical trials are published between 2012 to 2016,6 included studies were all randomized controlled trials;including a total of 642 patients received cryoballoon ablation treated patients,651 underwent radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of patients.The meta-analysis results suggest that radiofrequency catheter ablation and compared using cryoballoon ablation patients,its effectiveness(the recurrence rate of atrial fibrillation)had no significant difference(I2 =0%,P=0.57);cryoballoon ablation group had more complications than radiofrequency ablation(I2 = 0%,P=0.005);but cryoballoon ablation cryoballoon ablation significantly reduced the total procedure time(I 2 = 31%,P < 0.05).Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate greater improvement in total procedure duration for atrial fibrillation patients referred for cryoballoon ablation than those for radiofrequency ablation.The complications of the balloon ablation group were more than that of radiofrequency ablation. |
PDF Full Text Request