Introduction : AF patients require frequent clinical visits for adjustment of their medication and monitoring of anticoagulation treatment. This type of arrhythmia is also associated with increased numbers of emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and numerous procedures. Even in comparison with patients matched for age and the presence of cardiovascular disease. Due to symptoms and the risk of ischemic stroke in elderly patients, this type of arrhythmia is a source of considerable concern.AF patients has medical costs. The economic repercussions on national health systems around the world are considerable. The aim of our study was to: 1) Compare the outcome of these two new devices in AF ablation , 2) Evaluation and analysis of both intra-procedural as well as post-procedural complications and 3) Follow up of recurrence of AF in those patients after (3, 6 and 12 months) . Patient & methods our study included 200 patients presented with either paroxysmal or persistent AF who were divided into 2 groups according to the device used for ablation. Group 1 patients: Cryoablation was used for ablation; it included 130 patients (65%). Group 2 patients: Ablation Frontiers using novel decapolar ablation catheter (PVAC) was used for ablation it included 70 patients (35%). Results: By Comparing the two study groups, The Overall success rate was nearly similar being 84.6% for Cryoablation technique versus 84.3% for Ablation Frontiers using novel decapolar ablation catheter (PVAC). As regards the procedural time: PVAC had less procedural time 142 ± 27 versus 172 ± 33 for cryoablation and also less fluoro time 25.6 ± 6 for PVAC versus 32.5 ± 7 for cryoablation ( P value <0.001) . This may be related to the more time consuming preparation of the cryoballoon catheter. The higher fluoroscopy exposure observed for the cryoablation is a clear disadvantage and may be explained by the many repositioning and the need for fluoroscopy during the ablation to ensure catheter stability. Procedural complication: There were few adverse events in our study 2 groups. This study demonstrated comparable outcomes with respect to immediate success (pulmonary veins isolation) and procedural complications (atrial tachycardias, phrenic nerve palsy, pericardial effusion and/ or tamponade) as compared to other studies regardless of the atrial fibrillation classification.