The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Lower Incidence of Thrombus Formation With Cryoenergy Versus Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation
Abstract
Background— Radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation is limited by thromboembolic complications. The objective of this study was to compare the incidence and characteristics of thrombi complicating RF and cryoenergy ablation, a novel technology for the catheter-based treatment of arrhythmias. Methods and Results— Ablation lesions (n=197) were performed in 22 mongrel dogs at right atrial, right ventricular, and left ventricular sites preselected by a randomized factorial design devised to compare RF ablation with cryocatheter configurations of varying sizes (7F and 9F), cooling rates (−1°C/s, −5°C/s, and −20°C/s) and target temperatures (−55°C and −75°C). Animals were pretreated with acetylsalicylic acid and received intraprocedural intravenous unfractionated heparin. Seven days after ablation, the incidence of thrombus formation was significantly higher with RF than with cryoablation (75.8% versus 30.1%, P =0.0005). In a multiple regression model, RF energy remained an independent predictor of thrombus formation compared with cryoenergy (OR, 5.6; 95% CI, 1.7, 18.1; P =0.0042). Thrombus volume was also significantly greater with RF than with cryoablation (median, 2.8 versus 0.0 mm 3 ; P <0.0001). More voluminous thrombi were associated with larger RF lesions, but cryolesion dimensions were not predictive of thrombus size. Conclusions— RF energy is significantly more thrombogenic than cryoenergy, with a higher incidence of thrombus formation and larger thrombus volumes. The extent of hyperthermic tissue injury is positively correlated with thrombus bulk, whereas cryoenergy lesion size does not predict thrombus volume, most likely reflecting intact tissue ultrastructure with endothelial cell preservation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Calkins, H., Kuck, K. H., Cappato, R., Brugada, J., Camm, A. J., Chen, S.-A., Crijns, H. J. G., Damiano, R. J., Davies, D. W., DiMarco, J., et al. (2012) · Europace · doi:10.1093/europace/eus027 · Cited by 2,722
Calkins, H., Kuck, K. H., Cappato, R., Brugada, J., Camm, A. J., Chen, S.-A., Crijns, H. J. G., Damiano, R. J., Davies, D. W., DiMarco, J., et al. (2012) · Heart Rhythm · doi:10.1016/j.hrthm.2011.12.016 · Cited by 1,456
Mechanisms of cryoablation: Clinical consequences on malignant tumors
Baust, J. G., Gage, A. A., Bjerklund Johansen, T. E., & Baust, J. M. (2014) · Cryobiology · doi:10.1016/j.cryobiol.2013.11.001 · Cited by 239
Metadata
- Authors
- Khairy, P., Chauvet, P., Lehmann, J., Lambert, J., Macle, L., Tanguay, J.-F., Sirois, M. G., Santoianni, D., & Dubuc, M.
- Venue
- Circulation
- Published
- 2003-04-22
- Volume
- 107
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 2045-2050
- ISSN
- 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4539
- OpenAlex
- W2009802093
- Cited by
- 507
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Lower Incidence of Thrombus Formation With Cryoenergy Versus Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.0000058706.82623.a1
- The paper
- Khairy, P., Chauvet, P., Lehmann, J., Lambert, J., Macle, L., Tanguay, J.-F., Sirois, M. G., Santoianni, D., & Dubuc, M. (2003). Lower Incidence of Thrombus Formation With Cryoenergy Versus Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.0000058706.82623.a1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.