Safety and effectiveness of pulsed field ablation for pulmonary vein isolation in atrial fibrillation patients: a single centre experience

Abstract Introduction Atrial Fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent arrhythmia in the world with an exponentially increasing prevalence. Pulmonary veins (PV) are the primary triggering sites for AF and pulmonary veins isolation (PVI) is currently the standard therapy alongside pharmacological treatment and should be considered as first-line treatment. Pulsed-fieldablation (PFA) is a novel ablation modality that involves the application of electrical pulses causing cellular death, with preferential tissue specificity. Aim In this study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of single-shot PFA in AF patients. Methods Single-center registry of consecutive patients undergoing PVI using the pentaspline PFA catheter (all with CARTO3D system v.7 and high-density mapping), between June 2022 and November 2023. Data on demographics, procedural characteristics, and electrocardiographic recurrence (assessed after a 3-month blanking period) were analyzed. Results 152 consecutive patients were included (63 ± 10 years, 57% male), with a mean CHA2DS2-VASc score of 2±1 points, median LVEF of 60% (IQR 59-65%), and a median CT-scan derived left atrial volume index of 56 mL/m2(IQR 44-69 mL/m2). A total of 40% had non-paroxysmal AF and a redo procedure was performed in 17% of patients. The median procedure time was 78 min (IQR 58-111 min) and fluoroscopy time was 11.6 min (IQR 8.2-15.6 min). Additionally, posterior wall isolation (PWI) was performed in 63 patients (41%). There were no esophageal complications, phrenic nerve injuries, cerebrovascular events, or procedure-related deaths. Two patients (1.3%) experienced acute cardiac tamponade, immediately treated with pericardiocentesis. Other complications were primarily vascular, in 5% of cases (4 femoral hematomas, 3 femoral pseudoaneurysms, 1 arteriovenous fistula). Over 293 (IQR 170 - 394) days of follow-up, considering electrocardiographic recurrence, 12% of patients had AF recurrence (5 with paroxysmal AF and 10 with persistent AF). These patients were older (69 ± 7y vs. 62 ± 11y, p=0.016), were more likely to undergo a redo procedure (33 vs. 8%, p=0.004), and had a higher percentage of posterior wall isolation (21 vs. 8%, p=0.038). Conclusions PFA for PVI wall ablation is safe and effective, with 100% intraprocedural technical success, a low rate of complications, and a high percentage of patients free from AF in the short-term.