Limitation
This report has several limitations. First, this study had a very small sample size. A large population should be assessed. Second, AF recurrence was not assessed using a loop recorder; thus, less AF cases might have been detected. Third, selection bias is possible. The choice of RFA or CBA was based on the anatomical characteristics found on CT scans. Patients who received RFA might have a more complex anatomy. Fourth, in the RFA group, several patients underwent CA using a received non-contact force catheter, which might have led to a higher AF recurrence. After CBA was accepted in Japan, our hospital started to frequently use CBA. The patients in the RFA group tended to be treated at an earlier time. Fifth, the use of AAD after CA was based on the physician’s discretion with or without a documented ATA. Finally, 95% patients in the RFA group received CTI, but this ablation was not performed because of an expected beneficial effect on preventing AF recurrence.20