Pulsed field ablation for pulmonary vein isolation: real-world experience and characterization of the antral lesion size compared with cryoballoon ablation

Pulsed-field ablation versus radiofrequency or cryoballoon thermal ablation in atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This review investigated efficacy and safety of pulsed-field ablation (PFA) in comparison with radiofrequency ablation (RFA), cryoballoon ablation (CBA), or both combined. The Odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were computed. PFA allowed shorter procedure (MD -44.27 minutes, 95% CI: -63.61; -24.93) and left atrium (LA) dwell (MD -32.71 minutes (95% CI: -58.64; -6.78) times, but with longer fluoroscopy time than RFA (MD 8.54 minutes, 95% CI: 4.03; 13.04). Post-procedural complications rate was lower with PFA than CBA (OR 0.53, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.80). Atrial arrhythmias recurrence rate within one year of follow-up was lower with PFA than RFA (OR 0.68, 95% CI; 0.53; 0.87) and CBA (OR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.48; 0.97). PFA allowed shorter procedure and LA dwell times, as well as lower atrial arrhythmia recurrence than RFA and lower post-procedural complications and atrial arrhythmias recurrence rates than CBA.

Meta-analysis of Pulsed Field Ablation Versus Thermal Ablation for Pulmonary Vein Isolation in AF: A Broad Overview Focusing on Efficacy, Safety and Outcomes

The recently established non-thermal, single-shot pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a potential tool for achieving rapid pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) to cause cell death by electroporation, yet data regarding this state-of-the-art technology remain sparse. In this meta-analysis, we included 3,857 patients from 20 studies. There was no significant difference in AF recurrence between the PFA and control groups. Subgroup analysis showed that additional ablation beyond PVI has a similar rate of AF recurrence to PVI alone (10% versus 13%, respectively). PVI durability was achieved in 83% (mean), 95% CI [65-99%] of the PFA group and in 79% (mean), 95% CI [60-98%] of the control group, with no significant difference in the rate of PVI durability between the two groups. The PFA group had considerably reduced procedure duration, but not fluoroscopy time. No statistically significant differences in periprocedural complications were observed. PFA is associated with shorter procedural time than thermal ablation. Cardiac complications were uncommon and mainly reversible in both the PFA and control groups.

Pulsed field ablation versus thermal energy ablation for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of procedural efficiency, safety, and efficacy

BACKGROUND

Pulsed field ablation (PFA) induces cell death through electroporation using ultrarapid electrical pulses. We sought to compare the procedural efficiency characteristics, safety, and efficacy of ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) using PFA compared with thermal energy ablation.

METHODS

We performed an extensive literature search and systematic review of studies that compared ablation of AF with PFA versus thermal energy sources. Risk ratio (RR) 95% confidence intervals (CI) were measured for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) 95% CI were measured for continuous variables, where RR < 1 and MD < 0 favor the PFA group.

RESULTS

We included 6 comparative studies for a total of 1012 patients who underwent ablation of AF: 43.6% with PFA (n = 441) and 56.4% (n = 571) with thermal energy sources. There were significantly shorter procedures times with PFA despite a protocolized 20-min dwell time (MD - 21.95, 95% CI - 33.77, - 10.14, p = 0.0003), but with significantly longer fluroscopy time (MD 5.71, 95% CI 1.13, 10.30, p = 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences in periprocedural complications (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.59-2.44) or recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.31, 1.34) between the PFA and thermal ablation cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of this meta-analysis, PFA was associated with shorter procedural times and longer fluoroscopy times, but no difference in periprocedural complications or rates of recurrent AF when compared to ablation with thermal energy sources. However, larger randomized control trials are needed.

Ganglionic Plexus Ablation: A Step-by-step Guide for Electrophysiologists and Review of Modalities for Neuromodulation for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation

As the most common sustained arrhythmia, AF is a complex clinical entity which remains a difficult condition to durably treat in the majority of patients. Over the past few decades, the management of AF has focused mainly on pulmonary vein triggers for its initiation and perpetuation. It is well known that the autonomic nervous system (ANS) has a significant role in the milieu predisposing to the triggers, perpetuators and substrate for AF. Neuromodulation of ANS - ganglionated plexus ablation, vein of Marshall ethanol infusion, transcutaneous tragal stimulation, renal nerve denervation, stellate ganglion block and baroreceptor stimulation - constitute an emerging therapeutic approach for AF. The purpose of this review is to summarise and critically appraise the currently available evidence for neuromodulation modalities in AF.