Comparative effectiveness of catheter ablation devices in the treatment of atrial fibrillation: a network meta-analysis

Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is most commonly performed using radiofrequency (RF) and cryoballoon (CB) catheters. Ablation Index is a novel lesion-quality marker associated with improved outcomes in RF ablation. Due to lack of direct comparative evidence between the latest generations of technologies, there is uncertainty regarding the best treatment option. <b>Aim:</b> To conduct a network meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of RF with Ablation Index to other catheter ablation devices in the treatment of AF. <b>Methods:</b> Searches for randomized and nonrandomized prospective comparative studies of ablation catheters were conducted in multiple databases. The outcome of interest was 12-month freedom from atrial arrhythmias after a single ablation procedure. Studies were grouped as high-, low- and unclear-quality based on study design and balanced baseline patient characteristics. Bayesian hierarchical network meta-analysis was conducted and results presented as relative risk ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). <b>Results:</b> 12 studies evaluating five different catheter ablation devices were included. Radiofrequency ablation with Ablation Index was associated with statistically significantly greater probability of 12-month freedom from atrial arrhythmias than Arctic Front (relative risk: 1.77; 95% CrI: 1.21-2.87), Arctic Front Advance™ (1.41; 1.06-2.47), THERMOCOOL™ (1.34; 1.17-1.48) and THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH™ (1.09; 1-1.3). Results were robust in multiple sensitivity analyses. <b>Conclusion:</b> Radiofrequency catheter with Ablation Index is superior to currently available options for 12-month freedom from atrial arrhythmias after AF ablation. This study provides decision-makers with robust, pooled, comparative evidence of the latest ablation technologies.