Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2445/224181
Title: Patient-Reported Outcomes After First Pulmonary Vein Isolation for ParoxYsmal Atrial Fibrillation: Cryoballoon vs. Radiofrequency (SPY-AF)
Author: Nesti, Martina
Lucà, Fabiana
Mirizzi, Gianluca
Bakytzhanuly, Abay
Adelino, Raquel
Doundoulakis, Ioannis
Tsiachris, Dimitrios
Mitropoulou, Fotini
Jordan, Ana
Vanduynhoven, Philippe
Faga, Valentina
E. Papakonstantinou, Panteleimon
Xydonas, Sotirios
Gezzi, Iacopo
Rossi, Andrea
Garibaldi, Silvia
Sciarra, Luigi
Russo, Vincenzo
Palamà, Zefferino
De Masi De Luca, Gabriele
Gianluca Robles, Antonio
Landra, Federico
Issue Date: 23-Sep-2025
Publisher: MDPI AG
Abstract: Background/Objectives: Patient-reported outcome after treatment is an important factor that positively correlates with the quality of care and can influence the patient's future health choices. Both radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and cryoballoon ablation (CBA) are effective techniques for pulmonary vein isolation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and have shown similar results in efficacy and safety, but they have not been thoroughly compared in terms of patient satisfaction. The aim of this study is to assess the satisfaction of paroxysmal AF patients who underwent RFA and CBA after their first procedure. Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent their first procedure of pulmonary vein isolation with RFA or CBA in eight international centres were included. A ten-point Likert scale was used for measuring patient-reported outcomes, evaluating anxiety before procedure, pain during and after ablation, motivation to repeat the procedure in future if necessary, and real and perceived procedural time. Results: A total of 483 patients were enrolled. Median age was 63 [56-69] years, and 281 (58.1%) patients were men. In total, 385 (79.7%) patients underwent RFA and 98 (20.3%) underwent CBA. RFA and CBA were equivalent in terms of the satisfaction of the patient, with the only exception being groin pain, which was lower in the CBA group (2 [0-3] vs. 3 [1-4], p = 0.002). Conscious sedation was used in 414 (86.7%) patients and general anaesthesia in 69 (14.3%) patients. The use of general anaesthesia reduced the perceived pain during and after the procedure in both techniques (p < 0.05), but it resulted in lower pre-procedural anxiety only in RFA patients compared to those under conscious sedation (4 [2-6] vs. 5 [3-7], p = 0.007). Anaesthetic management alone did not affect the willingness to repeat the procedure in RFA patients, while CBA patients under general anaesthesia were more motivated to repeat the procedure than those under conscious sedation (10 [8-10] vs. 7 [6-8], p < 0.001). The perceived procedure time was shorter than the actual time in all settings. Conclusions: Anaesthetic management seems to have a greater impact on patient-reported outcome than the technique used during ablation. Despite this, patients most motivated to repeat the procedure were those who underwent CBA under general anaesthesia.
Note: Reproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14196711
It is part of: Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2025, vol. 14, issue. 19, p. 6711
URI: https://hdl.handle.net/2445/224181
Related resource: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14196711
Appears in Collections:Articles publicats en revistes (Institut d'lnvestigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL))

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
jcm-14-06711.pdf491.33 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.