A randomized comparison of manual pressure versus figure‐of‐eight suture for hemostasis after cryoballoon ablation for atrial fibrillation

摘要

Abstract Introduction Cryoballoon ablation is commonly used to treat atrial fibrillation (AF). Femoral vein hemostasis after cryoballoon ablation for AF is routinely achieved with manual pressure (MP) after reversal of heparin and reassessment of the activated clotting time, or with a figure‐of‐eight suture (F8). The purpose of this randomized trial was to compare these two techniques for femoral vein hemostasis after cryoballoon ablation for AF in a patient population predominantly on novel anticoagulants (NOAC). Methods and Results Seventy consecutive patients who underwent cryoballoon ablation were randomized to either the MP or F8 for femoral vein hemostasis. Clinical and procedural characteristics were similar between the groups with the majority of patients treated with a NOAC. The total time in the electrophysiology laboratory for the MP group and the F8 group (197?±?37?minutes vs 167?±?36?minutes, respectively; P ?=?.02), and the time from sheath removal until the patient left the laboratory (28?±?9?minutes vs 20?±?5?minutes, respectively; P ??.0001) were significantly less in the F8 group. Additional pressure for hemostasis in the recovery suite was required more often in the MP Group, as opposed to the F8 group (29% vs 3%; P ?=?.003). No major bleeding occurred and the rate of minor hematomas was statistically similar. Conclusions Hemostasis obtained with a F8 suture after cryoballoon ablation for AF is associated with significantly less patient time in the electrophysiology laboratory, and an improved safety profile, compared with manual hemostasis, even amongst patients treated with a NOAC.