OBJECTIVES:: The authors performed a healthcare utilization and cost comparison of RF ablation versus medical treatment among AF patients in the Brazilian private healthcare system. METHODS:: Data were analyzed from the Orizon database. The study population consisted of 165 consecutive patients who underwent RF ablation procedures for AF. Healthcare utilization and costs were measured from 2 years before to 2 years after the procedure. That is the preliminary results from the 50 first patients analyzed. RESULTS:: Considering a total of AF patients who underwent catheter ablation, 45 had at least 3 months follow-up prior the ablation and 45 had at least 3 months follow-up post ablation. There was no difference in the 2-years estimated number of outpatient visits prior and after ablation (4.8 visits (± 4.3) vs. 3.9 visits (± 4.4), p=0.29), but the outpatient’s costs (including appointments and exams) were lower after ablation procedure (R$ 2,732.17 (± 3,299) vs. R$ 1,642.05 (± 1,326), p=0.02). The 2-years estimated emergency care visits and costs were lower after ablation procedure (2.02 visits (± 2.23) vs. 0.96 visits (± 1.98), p=0.006) and (R$ 3,781.03 (± 5,784) vs. R$ 499.90 (± 1,489), p=0.0003), respectively. Patients before ablation had a higher risk of overall complications and arrhythmia in the ER visits (OR 4.5 – CI 95% 1.8 to 11 – p=0.0009) and (OR 17.2 – CI 95% 3.7 to 79.8 – p=0.0001), respectively. There was no difference regarding stroke and angina pectoris in the ER visits (p=0,49 and p=0,71), respectively. CONCLUSIONS:: Catheter ablation in AF patients reduces outpatients costs, emergency room utilization and costs and the risk of overall complications and arrhythmia ER related visits, but doesn’t reduce the risk of stroke and angina pectoris ER related visits.