Catheter radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation has entered the three-dimensional era since the beginning of the 21st century, and with the increase in operator experience, the average success rate has increased year by year to basically enter a plateau at present, with initial success rate of 50-70% for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, multiple success rates of more than 90%, and single close to 50% for chronic atrial fibrillation with multiple success rates of about 70-80%, with complications also stabilized at a relatively low level. With sufficient clinical evidence, the interventional treatment of atrial fibrillation, mainly catheter ablation, has been increasingly accepted by the public in recent years. The number of electrophysiologists who can independently perform catheter ablation is increasing very slowly compared to the health requirements of the increasing patient population, because the operation of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation is extremely complicated, and even in electrophysiology centers with more than 1,000 procedures per year, only 2-3 skilled operators can be trained each year, so how to benefit more patients is an urgent issue. Atrial fibrillation can be “cured” by interventional treatment because of two things: first, the mechanism of atrial fibrillation, especially paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, is clear, and the pulmonary vein region is the key region for the occurrence and maintenance of atrial fibrillation, and electrical isolation of the pulmonary vein region is the cornerstone for atrial fibrillation to be cured. The “foci” of chronic AF are not limited to the pulmonary vein region, so it is often necessary to intervene in other areas such as the coronary sinus, superior vena cava, auricle, septum, atrium, isthmus, and border ridge after isolating the pulmonary vein, which varies from person to person, and currently the only way to ablate them is through radiofrequency ablation catheters while measuring them; secondly, advances in medical devices have made it possible to isolate the pulmonary vein region, including Johnson & Johnson’s CARTO system and the continuous improvement of ENSITE system of St. Jude, the continuous improvement of cold saline infusion large head electrode, etc. The newly entered Chinese market cryoballoon can be close to a moderately skilled operator in terms of isolation speed and isolation efficiency with RF catheter for point-by-point isolation. To solve the current contradiction between the increasing health needs of the people and skilled operators must also require technological advances. Since the pulmonary vein region has been proven to be the key region for the development of atrial fibrillation, a large part of the technical improvement is around how to isolate the pulmonary vein better, faster and more effectively, and various companies have developed many products in recent years, such as annular ablation catheters, confocal ultrasound balloons, laser balloons, cryoballoons, etc. Among them, cryoballoon is the more mature product and has clinical evidence of tens of thousands of cases in foreign countries, and the overall efficiency is not inferior to that of catheter radiofrequency ablation. The advantage of cryoballoon is that it can isolate the pulmonary vein quickly and effectively if the apposition is satisfactory, and the risk of thrombosis during ablation is low in principle because of the freezing energy used, and the biggest advantage is that the use of cryoballoon technology does not involve a lot of electrophysiological knowledge, and doctors with experience in cardiac interventions including coronary interventions and precordial interventions can be skilled in this technology with training and 20-30 cases of clinical experience. This technique can be performed proficiently with training and clinical experience in 20-30 cases. For relatively skilled electrophysiologists, the advantages of cryoballoon are not obvious, first of all, its operation time is not superior to that of catheter radiofrequency ablation, and the average operation time of 2 hours is enough for a skilled operator to isolate the pulmonary veins with catheters; secondly, cryoballoon technology requires clear imaging assistance, and the required X-ray radiation dose is larger than that of ordinary catheter ablation, which is more than 3-4 times, and X-ray radiation is harmful to human body; thirdly, the cryoballoon technology requires clear imaging assistance, and the required X-ray radiation dose is larger than that of ordinary catheter ablation. Third, if the patient’s atrial fibrillation is not of pulmonary vein origin or combined with other arrhythmias such as atrial flutter and atrial tachycardia, which require electrophysiological techniques to mark the origin and key parts of the arrhythmia, the cryoballoon technique cannot help; fourth, the cryoballoon can cause right phrenic nerve palsy, the incidence of which is reported in the literature as nearly 1/6, but most of them can heal spontaneously within six months, and the occurrence of perioperative stroke has also been reported. Fifthly, the cost of treatment is more expensive than that of catheterized radiofrequency ablation, about 100,000 yuan per case. In conclusion, personally, I am quite happy to see such an effective new technology as cryoballoon entering the field of electrophysiology to serve the majority of patients with arrhythmias, and I would also like to see more cardiologists devote themselves to the interventional treatment of atrial fibrillation, personally I am curious and interested in the new technology, but I think the greater interest lies in studying the arrhythmia mechanism of each patient, and more specimens are measured and analyzed to deduce the mechanism of arrhythmia. We can deduce the exact mechanism of the arrhythmia and then choose the appropriate treatment for it, which cannot be achieved by cryoballoon technology alone.