Luiz, Laura

ABSTRACT Background The efficacy and safety of PolarX cryoballoon for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear. Methods PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched for studies comparing the PolarX vs. standard cryoballoon (CB‐2/CB‐4). Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were computed for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively. Results This systematic review and meta‐analysis included 2 randomized controlled trials and 18 observational studies with a total of 7107 patients, of whom 3.188 (44.8%) underwent ablation with PolarX. When compared to standard cryoablation, PolarX had similar incidence of atrial arrhythmias recurrence (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.82–1.32; p = 0.73), acute PVI success (OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.31–2.68; p = 0.98), and procedural duration (MD 3.41; 95% CI ‐2.89 to 9.71; p = 0.29). However, PolarX was associated with higher persistent phrenic nerve palsy (OR 2.17; 95% CI 1.26–3.74; p = 0.005) and a lower nadir temperature in all veins. Additionally, in a subgroup analysis of randomized trials and propensity score matching studies, similar findings were noted for recurrence of atrial arrhythmias. Conclusion In patients with AF undergoing PVI, PolarX had similar acute PVI success, procedural duration, and recurrence of atrial arrhythmias as compared with standard cryoballoon technology, however, was associated with a lower nadir temperature, and higher rates of persistent nerve palsy.