Wide antral circumferential vs. ostial pulmonary vein isolation using pulsed field ablation-the butterfly effect

Beyond Pulmonary Vein Reconnection: Exploring the Dynamic Pathophysiology of Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence After Catheter Ablation

Atrial fibrillation (Afib) recurrence after catheter ablation (CA) remains a significant clinical challenge, driven by a complex and dynamic interplay of structural, electrical, and autonomic mechanisms. While pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the cornerstone of CA, recurrence rates remain substantial, highlighting the need to understand the evolving pathophysiology beyond PV reconnection. Post-ablation changes, including inflammation, edema, oxidative stress, and ischemia, create a transient proarrhythmic state that may contribute to early recurrence. Over time, atrial remodeling, fibrosis, and residual autonomic activity further sustain arrhythmogenicity. Additionally, epicardial adipose tissue promotes atrial myopathy, accelerating disease progression, particularly in patients with risk factors such as older age, female sex, obesity, hypertension, obstructive sleep apnea, and heart failure. The multifactorial nature of Afib recurrence underscores the limitations of a "one-size-fits-all" ablation strategy. Instead, a patient-specific approach integrating advanced mapping techniques, multimodal imaging, and computational modeling is essential. Artificial intelligence (AI) and digital twin models hold promise for predicting recurrence by simulating individualized disease progression and optimizing ablation strategies. However, challenges remain regarding the standardization and validation of these novel approaches. A deeper understanding of the dynamic interconnections between the mechanisms driving recurrence is crucial for improving long-term CA outcomes. This review explores the evolving nature of Afib recurrence, emphasizing the need for a precision medicine approach that accounts for the continuous interaction of pathophysiological processes in order to refine patient selection, ablation strategies, and post-procedural management.

[Guideline to safe and effective atrial fibrillation ablation with pulsed-field ablation using the pentaspline PFA system as an example]

Atrial fibrillation ablation is an established procedure for the treatment of atrial fibrillation, in which Pulsed Field Ablation (PFA) is a novel method alongside radiofrequency and cryoablation. The article explains the technical basics of PFA, describes different types of catheters and gives detailed instructions on how to perform the procedure, from patient selection to sedation strategies and imaging. Important safety aspects and possible complications are also covered. Finally, the further development of PFA technology for the treatment of other arrhythmias and integration into 3D mapping systems is discussed. This work is part of a series of articles on further training in special rhythmology.

Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: indications and future perspective

Recent advances in techniques, technologies and proven superiority over anti-arrhythmic drugs have made catheter ablation the cornerstone of management for atrial fibrillation (AF), which has shown a steady increase in prevalence in the ageing population worldwide. The aim of therapeutic interventions is to achieve stable sinus rhythm that would improve the quality of life and reduce the risk of AF-associated complications. Pulmonary veins (PVs) were first described as the source of initiation of ectopic triggers driving AF, which led to the establishment of PV isolation (PVI) as the most widely practiced procedure to treat AF. Antral PVI is still recognized as the stand-alone ablation strategy for newly diagnosed paroxysmal AF (PAF). However, in non-PAF patients, PVI seems to be inadequate and several adjunctive strategies, including ablation of left atrial posterior wall and non-PV triggers, AF mapping and ablation of rotors and drivers, ethanol infusion of vein of Marshall and renal denervation, etc. have been reported with mixed results. Recent trials have also documented the benefits of early rhythm control in preventing cardiovascular events in addition to slowing the progression of PAF to more persistent forms. Similarly, very late relapse of the arrhythmia after successful PVI has drawn attention to the critical role of non-PV triggers and highlighted their relevance as potential ablation targets during repeat procedures. Ablation technology is also under constant evolution with the introduction of non-thermal energy sources and new tools to create durable lesions. This review summarizes the indications, advancements, and future perspective of AF ablation.

Safety and Efficacy of Pulse Field Ablation in the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation and Its Comparison with Traditional Thermal Ablation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pulsed field ablation (PFA) and to compare it with the efficacy and safety of traditional thermal ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were searched for randomized or observational studies exploring the efficacy and safety of PFA and comparing PFA with traditional thermal ablation in patients with AF.

RESULTS

A total of 4437 patients from 16 studies that only included PFA as the ablation method and 1792 patients from 9 comparing PFA to traditional thermal ablation were included in the final analysis. In studies that considered PFA alone, the freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-0.84), and the incidence of periprocedural complications was 0.03 (95% CI 0.02-0.05). In comparative studies, there was no significant difference in the freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence (odds ratio (OR) 1.24, 95% CI 0.90-1.72) and the incidence of periprocedural complications (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.37-1.48) of PFA compared to that of traditional thermal ablation. In the subgroup with a follow-up period less than 12 months, PFA had higher freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence rate compared to thermal ablation (OR 2.19, 95% CI 1.14-4.20).

CONCLUSIONS

PFA is a safe and effective catheter ablation method that is not inferior to the traditional and well-established thermal ablation. It can be used as a treatment of choice for patients with AF.

THE PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42023473026, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=473026.

Impact of Left Atrial Posterior Wall Ablation During Pulsed-Field Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone is insufficient to treat many patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PersAF). Adjunctive left atrial posterior wall (LAPW) ablation with thermal technologies has revealed lack of efficacy, perhaps limited by the difficulty in achieving lesion durability amid concerns of esophageal injury.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to compare the safety and effectiveness of PVI + LAPW ablation vs PVI in patients with PersAF using pulsed-field ablation (PFA).

METHODS

In a retrospective analysis of the MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) registry, we studied consecutive PersAF patients undergoing post-approval treatment with a pentaspline PFA catheter. The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from any atrial arrhythmia of ≥30 seconds. Safety outcomes included the composite of acute and chronic major adverse events.

RESULTS

Of the 547 patients with PersAF who underwent PFA, 131 (24%) received adjunctive LAPW ablation. Compared to PVI-alone, patients receiving adjunctive LAPW ablation were younger (65 vs 67 years of age, P = 0.08), had a lower CHA2DS2-VASc score (2.3 ± 1.6 vs 2.6 ± 1.6, P = 0.08), and were more likely to receive electroanatomical mapping (48.1% vs 39.0%, P = 0.07) and intracardiac echocardiography imaging (46.1% vs 17.1%, P < 0.001). The 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmias was not statistically different between groups in the full (PVI + LAPW: 66.4%; 95% CI: 57.6%-74.4% vs PVI: 73.1%; 95% CI: 68.5%-77.2%; P = 0.68) and propensity-matched cohorts (PVI + LAPW: 71.7% vs PVI: 68.5%; P = 0.34). There was also no significant difference in major adverse events between the groups (2.2% vs 1.4%, respectively, P = 0.51).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with PersAF undergoing PFA, as compared to PVI-alone, adjunctive LAPW ablation did not improve freedom from atrial arrhythmia at 12 months.

Impact of pulsed field ablation on intraluminal esophageal temperature

INTRODUCTION

Atrio-esophageal fistula after esophageal thermal injury (ETI) is one of the most devastating complications of available energy sources for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) uses electroporation as a new energy source for catheter ablation with promising periprocedural safety advantages over existing methods due to its unique myocardial tissue sensitivity. In preclinical animal studies, a dose-dependent esophageal temperature rise has been reported. In the TESO-PFA registry intraluminal esophageal temperature (TESO) changes in a clinical setting are evaluated.

METHODS

Consecutive symptomatic AF patients (62 years, 67% male, 61% paroxysmal AF, CHA2 DS2 Vasc Score 2) underwent first-time PFA and were prospectively enrolled into our registry. Eight pulse trains (2 kV/2.5 s, bipolar, biphasic, x4 basket/flower configuration each) were delivered to each pulmonary vein (PV). Two extra pulse trains per PV in flower configuration were added for wide antral circumferential ablation. Continuous intraluminal esophageal temperature (TESO) was monitored with a 12-pole temperature probe.

RESULTS

Median TESO change was statistically significant and increased by 0.8 ± 0.6°C, p < .001. A TESO increase ≥ 1°C was observed in 10/43 (23%) patients. The highest TESO measured was 40.3°C. The largest TESO difference (∆TESO) was 3.7°C. All patients remained asymptomatic considering possible ETI. No atrio-esophageal fistula was reported on follow-up.

CONCLUSION

A small but significant intraluminal esophageal temperature rise can be observed in most patients during PFA. TESO rise over 40°C is rare. The clinical implications of the observed findings need to be further evaluated.