Abstract
BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation (CA) is an effective therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) and, although radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is the standard treatment for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), it is complex and time-consuming. Laser balloon ablation (LBA) has been introduced to simplify the conventional RFA; however, results of studies comparing LBA and RFA remain controversial. As such, this investigation aimed to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of LBA versus RFA. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for relevant studies. The primary endpoints were the freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia (ATA) and procedure-related complications. RESULTS: Twelve studies including 1274 subjects were included. LBA and RFA yielded similar rates of freedom from ATA (72.5% vs. 68.7%, odds ratio [OR] = 1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-1.7, p = 0.11) and procedure-related complications (7.7% vs. 6.5%, OR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.72-1.90, p = 0.536). LBA with the second- and third-generation laser balloons (LB2/3) yielded remarkably higher rates of freedom from ATA than RFA using contact-force technology (RFA-CF) (OR = 1.91, p = 0.013). Significantly lower pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection rates (OR = 0.51, p = 0.021), but higher phrenic nerve palsy (PNP) rates (OR = 3.42, p = 0.023) were observed in the LBA group. LBA had comparable procedure (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 8.43 min, p = 0.337) and fluoroscopy times (WMD = 3.09 min, p = 0.174), but a longer ablation time (WMD = 12.57 min, p = 0.00) than those for RFA. CONCLUSIONS: LBA and RFA treatments were comparable in terms of freedom from ATA and postprocedural complications in patients with AF. Compared with RFA, LBA was associated with significantly lower PV reconnection rates, but a higher incidence of PNP and longer ablation time.