Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of a circular duty-cycled radiofrequency-based pulmonary vein ablation catheter (PVAC, Medtronic, Minneapolis USA) and a circular, irrigated multipolar ablation catheter nMARQTM (Biosense Webster, CA, USA).
Methods: and results: One hundred and twenty patients (mean age 64.7±11.9; male n=67) suffering from drug-resistant paroxysmal AF referred for PVI were treated either with the PVAC ablation catheter (n=45) or the nMARQTM (n=75). Fourtyseven percent of the patients had a history of prior PVI ablation in the nMARQTM group, but only 15 % in the PVAC group. The primary endpoint was freedom from symptomatic or documented AF>30sec. In a subset of patients the duration and number of energy applications was analyzed. Mean follow up was 8,3±11,9 months. Freedom from atrial fibrillation after one single procedure was 61,3% in the NMarque and 60% in the PVAC group (ns). Complications occurred in 5,8% of the patients and did not differ between the groups (including air embolism n=1; oesophageal ulcer n=1, inflammatory pericardial effusion n=1, TIA five days after the procedure n=1, peripheral complications n=3). The total mean number and duration of energy application was significantly higher in the PVAC group, when compared to the nMARQTMgroup (p<0.05 and p< 0.001 respectively).
Conclusions: Both catheters are effective and safe in treating patients with AF and have comparable success rates