Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 13, 2025
Direct Pressure Monitoring Accurately Predicts Pulmonary Vein Occlusion During Cryoballoon Ablation
Published on: February 26, 2013
Comparison of pulsed-field ablation versus very high power short duration-ablation for pulmonary vein isolation
Jonas Wörmann1, Jan-Hendrik Schipper1, Jakob Lüker1
1Department of Electrophysiology, Heart Center, University of Cologne, Köln, Germany.
Background:
The newly introduced nonthermal pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a promising technology to achieve fast pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with high acute success rates and good safety features. However, previous studies have shown that very high power short duration ablation (VHPSD) is also highly effective and fast to achieve PVI with potentially less arrhythmia recurrence compared to conventional radiofrequency ablation. Data comparing PFA to VHPSD-PVI is lacking.
Objective:
This study compared procedural and outcome data for PFA-PVI to VHPSD-PVI in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (PAF/persAF).
Methods:
Consecutive patients undergoing de novo PVI (PFA or VHPSD) were included in this analysis. For PFA-PVI a pentaspline 20 electrode catheter was used. For VHPSD-PVI an enhanced irrigated catheter with a power setting of 70 W/7 s (70 W/5 s at posterior wall) was employed in conjunction with electro-anatomical mapping. All procedures were performed in deep analgo-sedation.
Results:
A total of n = 114 patients (n = 57[50%] PFA, n = 17[30%] PAF; n = 40[70%] persAF) were included in this analysis. PVI was successful in all patients. The PFA group revealed a significantly shorter procedure duration (65 ± 17 min vs. 95 ± 23 min, p < 0.01) but longer fluoroscopy time (PFA 15 ± 5 min and VHPSD 12 ± 3 min; p < 0.001). At follow-up after median 125 days (interquartile range: 109-162) n = 46 PFA (80.7%) and n = 44 VHPSD pts (77.2%) were free from atrial arrhythmia after a single procedure (p = 0.819). Two tamponades occurred in the PFA while in VHPSD two pts suffered groin bleedings. One clinically nonsignificant PV stenosis occurred in the VHPSD group.
Conclusion:
Pulsed-field ablation and VHPSD-PVI seem to be highly effective and safe to achieve PVI in the setting of PAF and persAF with comparable arrhythmia-free survival. However, procedure duration for PFA PVI is significantly shorter and therefore may be of potential benefit. Compared to PFA VHPSD-PVI might ensure information on left atrial substrate allowing to target concomitant secondary tachycardias.
