Cryoablation versus antiarrhythmic therapy for initial treatment of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation is a common cardiac arrhythmia that affects approximately 2% of the overall population. Current guidelines suggest the use of antiarrhythmic agents as initial therapy in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation; however, using cryoablation as a first-line therapy might provide increased efficacy. METHODS We conducted a systematic review from inception to March 2021 to find randomized controlled trials (RCT) that directly compared cryoablation therapy versus antiarrhythmic therapy as initial treatment for atrial fibrillation. RESULTS The primary outcome of our meta-analysis was recurrence of atrial arrhythmias. The secondary outcome evaluated serious adverse events of each therapy. Three RCTs involving 724 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed a statistically significant reduction in recurrence of atrial arrhythmias in patients receiving cryoablation compared to antiarrhythmic therapy [RR 0.60, 95% CI (0.50, 0.72), P < 0.00001, I2 = 0%]. There was no significant difference in serious adverse events between patients receiving cryoablation compared to patients receiving antiarrhythmic therapy [RR 0.80, 95% CI (0.57, 1.13), P = 0.21, I2 = 0%]. CONCLUSION Our meta-analysis showed that cryoablation therapy as initial therapy is more efficacious than antiarrhythmic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation without an increased risk of serious adverse events.