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 pat...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Radcliffe Medical Media
2024-08-01
|
| Series: | Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology Review |
| Online Access: | https://www.aerjournal.com/articleindex/aer.2024.05 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | 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. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2050-3369 2050-3377 |