Serial Artificial Intelligence ECG-Derived Atrial Fibrillation Probability and Recurrence Risk After Pulsed Field Ablation

BACKGROUND: Pulsed field ablation is now widely used for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, but atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence remains common and postablation risk tools are limited. We assessed whether a validated sinus‑rhythm artificial intelligence— enabled ECG AF probability score, and its early postablation change, predicts recurrence after pulsed field ablation. METHODS: We studied consecutive patients undergoing index pulsed field ablation across 3 Mayo Clinic sites (February 2024–March 2025) with ≥1 sinus‑rhythm ECG within 180 days preprocedure. Baseline artificial intelligence—enabled ECG AF score (range 0–1) was the mean across baseline ECGs. Recovery indices (RI30/60/90), defined as mean postprocedure artificial intelligence—enabled ECG score within days 1–30/60/90 minus baseline, predicted post‑blanking recurrence using corresponding 30‑, 60‑, and 90‑day blanking windows. The primary outcome was time to first documented AF/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia episode >30 seconds, ascertained via clinic ECGs, ambulatory monitoring, and device interrogations. Cox regression adjusted for prespecified clinical and echocardiographic covariates assessed associations; Harrell C‑statistic quantified discrimination. RESULTS: Among 1052 patients (67±10 years; 33% women), median baseline score was 0.35; 320 (30%) recurred over 188 days. Higher baseline score independently predicted recurrence (hazard ratio per 0.1 increase, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.03–1.14]). Scores rose on day 0 after ablation, then declined over subsequent weeks, with persistently higher, less‑improving trajectories among patients who recurred (time×recurrence interaction P <0.001). Day 0 score was not independently associated with recurrence after adjustment. Attenuated early recovery (higher recovery index) was independently associated with recurrence, most robustly for RI-90 (hazard ratio per 0.1 increase, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.07–1.24]), and improved discrimination beyond baseline and covariates (C‑statistic, 0.63–0.67; ΔC=0.04). Findings were consistent in a historical thermal ablation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline and early postablation dynamics of a sinus‑rhythm artificial intelligence—enabled ECG AF probability score are associated with pulsed field ablation recurrence and may aid multivariable risk stratification; prospective validation is warranted.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Circulation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
Published
2026-10-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/circep.126.015183
Primary Topic
Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Serial Artificial Intelligence ECG-Derived Atrial Fibrillation Probability and Recurrence Risk After Pulsed Field Ablation

Paul A. Friedman, Kathryn E. Mangold, James Y. Kim, Komandoor S. Srivathsan et al.
Circulation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
article

Serial Artificial Intelligence ECG-Derived Atrial Fibrillation Probability and Recurrence Risk After Pulsed Field Ablation

Paul A. Friedman, Kathryn E. Mangold, James Y. Kim, Komandoor S. Srivathsan, Peter A. Noseworthy, Zachi Itzhak Attia, Mayank Sardana, Hema Srikanth Vemulapalli, Juan F. Rodriguez, Julia Wood
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pulsed field ablation is now widely used for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, but atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence remains common and postablation risk tools are limited. We assessed whether a validated sinus‑rhythm artificial intelligence— enabled ECG AF probability score, and its early postablation change, predicts recurrence after pulsed field ablation. METHODS: We studied consecutive patients undergoing index pulsed field ablation across 3 Mayo Clinic sites (February 2024–March 2025) with ≥1 sinus‑rhythm ECG within 180 days preprocedure. Baseline artificial intelligence—enabled ECG AF score (range 0–1) was the mean across baseline ECGs. Recovery indices (RI30/60/90), defined as mean postprocedure artificial intelligence—enabled ECG score within days 1–30/60/90 minus baseline, predicted post‑blanking recurrence using corresponding 30‑, 60‑, and 90‑day blanking windows. The primary outcome was time to first documented AF/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia episode >30 seconds, ascertained via clinic ECGs, ambulatory monitoring, and device interrogations. Cox regression adjusted for prespecified clinical and echocardiographic covariates assessed associations; Harrell C‑statistic quantified discrimination. RESULTS: Among 1052 patients (67±10 years; 33% women), median baseline score was 0.35; 320 (30%) recurred over 188 days. Higher baseline score independently predicted recurrence (hazard ratio per 0.1 increase, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.03–1.14]). Scores rose on day 0 after ablation, then declined over subsequent weeks, with persistently higher, less‑improving trajectories among patients who recurred (time×recurrence interaction P <0.001). Day 0 score was not independently associated with recurrence after adjustment. Attenuated early recovery (higher recovery index) was independently associated with recurrence, most robustly for RI-90 (hazard ratio per 0.1 increase, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.07–1.24]), and improved discrimination beyond baseline and covariates (C‑statistic, 0.63–0.67; ΔC=0.04). Findings were consistent in a historical thermal ablation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline and early postablation dynamics of a sinus‑rhythm artificial intelligence—enabled ECG AF probability score are associated with pulsed field ablation recurrence and may aid multivariable risk stratification; prospective validation is warranted.

Circulation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
Mayo Clinic in Arizona (US), Valley Baptist Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.