Compare the effectiveness of THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH^® Catheter/THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH^® SF Catheter with Ablation Index (STAI) on recurrence of atrial arrhythmias 12 months after catheter ablation to that of Arctic Front Advance™ (CB)

• Matching Adjusted Indirect Comparison 

• STAI: IPD from two prospective studies, Solimene et al. 2019 and Hussein et al. 2017. 

• Three CB studies were identified in a systematic literature review 

When age, sex, and LVEF were adjusted, a significant 70% reduction in recurrence rate was associated with STAI when compared to CB (HR 0.30; 95% CI 0.13–0.71). 

Compare the effectiveness of THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH^® Catheter/THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH^® SF Catheter with Ablation Index/ SURPOINT™ (STAI) to other available catheters for AF ablation.

• Bayesian network meta-analysis 

• 12 studies (1,722 patients) were identified in a systematic literature review 

STAI was associated with were significantly higher freedom from atrial arrhythmias at 12 months

• 77% greater likelihood than Arctic Front
• 41% greater likelihood than Arctic Front Advance™
• 34% greater likelihood than THERMOCOOL™ Catheter
• 9% greater likelihood than THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH^® Catheter/THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH^® SF Catheter alone

Evaluate the costs of AF ablation with the THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH^® Catheter (ST), THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH^® SF Catheter (SF) and Arctic Front Advance™ Cardiac Cryoablation Catheter (CB).

• A decision tree model was developed to compare outcomes of simulated scenarios 

• Cost outcomes were compared between ablations using ST vs. SF, and ablations using ST vs. CB 

• Expected savings for ST compared to CB was $8,206 (inpatient), $3,859 (outpatient) and $4,494 (hospital mix) 

• Expected savings for ST compared to SF was $1,763 (inpatient), $1,405 (outpatient) and $1,488 (hospital mix)