Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) represents the most common arrhythmia in clinical practice, characterized by irregular atrial electrical activity originating mainly in and around the pulmonary veins. This condition can manifest itself symptomatically or silently but still dangerously. Complications associated with AF include stroke, heart failure, worst clinical outcome in patients with underlying conditions, increased emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and cardiovascular mortality. Currently, according to the main international guidelines, antiarrhythmic therapy is considered the first choice for rhythm control in patients with AF despite modest efficacy and non-negligible side effects. In recent decades, radiofrequency catheter ablation has emerged as an alternative to antiarrhythmic drugs for rhythm control. Cryoablation was developed with the aim of reducing procedural times and reducing complications related to the ablative procedure with radiofrequency without losing efficacy. Recent studies conducted with rigour and scientific solidity have demonstrated on the one hand that the results of this technique are not inferior compare with radiofrequency. This study aims to compare data on the safety and efficacy of cryoablation with those obtained from antiarrhythmic drugs through a review of the most recent scientific evidence.