Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 10, 2026
Epicardial Outgrowth Culture Assay and Ex Vivo Assessment of Epicardial-derived Cell Migration
Published on: March 18, 2016
Difference between endocardial and epicardial application of pulsed fields for targeting Epicardial Ganglia: An
Francisco Estevez-Laborí1, Barry O'Brien2, Ana González-Suárez3
1Universidad Internacional de Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Background:
Pulsed Field Ablation (PFA) has recently been proposed as a non-thermal energy to treat atrial fibrillation by selective ablation of ganglionated plexi (GP) embedded in epicardial fat. While some of PFA-technologies use an endocardial approach, others use epicardial access with promising pre-clinical results. However, as each technology uses a different and sometimes proprietary pulse application protocol, the comparation between endocardial vs. epicardial approach is almost impossible in experimental terms. For this reason, our study, based on a computational model, allows a direct comparison of electric field distribution and thermal-side effects of both approaches under equal conditions in terms of electrode design, pulse protocol and anatomical characteristics of the tissues involved.
Methods:
2D computational models with axial symmetry were built for endocardial and epicardial approaches. Atrial (1.5-2.5 mm) and fat (1-5 mm) thicknesses were varied to simulate a representative sample of what happens during PFA ablation for different applied voltage values (1000, 1500 and 2000 V) and number of pulses (30 and 50).
Results:
The epicardial approach was superior for capturing greater volumes of fat when the applied voltage was increased: 231 mm3/kV with the epicardial approach vs. 182 mm3/kV with the endocardial approach. In relation to collateral damage to the myocardium, the epicardial approach considerably spares the myocardium, unlike what happens with the endocardial approach. Although the epicardial approach caused much more thermal damage in the fat, there is not a significant difference between the approaches in terms of size of thermal damage in the myocardium.
Conclusions:
Our results suggest that epicardial PFA ablation of GPs is more effective than an endocardial approach. The proximity and directionality of the electric field deposited using an epicardial approach are key to ensuring that higher electric field strengths and increased temperatures are obtained within the epicardial fat, thus contributing to selective ablation of the GPs with minimal myocardial damage.
