A real-world case–control study on the efficacy and safety of pulsed field ablation for atrial fibrillation
-
Published:2023-11-15
Issue:1
Volume:28
Page:
-
ISSN:2047-783X
-
Container-title:European Journal of Medical Research
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Eur J Med Res
Author:
Yang Ming,Wang Peng-yu,Hao Ying-lu,Liang Mei,Yu Zi-yang,Li Xi-chen,Li Yan-ping
Abstract
Abstract
Objective
The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pulsed field ablation in individuals diagnosed with atrial fibrillation.
Methods
A total of 36 patients diagnosed with atrial fibrillation were enrolled in the pulsed field ablation group, while another 36 patients diagnosed with atrial fibrillation were included in the radiofrequency ablation group. Among the study participants, 15 patients in the pulsed field ablation group and 17 patients in the radiofrequency ablation group had persistent atrial fibrillation. Comprehensive comparisons were made between the two groups, including baseline data, underlying diseases, medication usage, intraoperative parameters, and atrial fibrillation recurrence rates at 1, 3, and 6 months during the postoperative follow-up period.
Results
(1) There were no significant differences observed between the two groups concerning baseline data and antiarrhythmic drug usage (P > 0.05); (2) the effective ablation time for both left and right pulmonary veins in the pulsed field ablation group was markedly shorter compared to the radiofrequency ablation group (P < 0.001 for each vein); (3) within the pulsed field ablation group, the number of discharges, catheter operation time, and effective ablation time for the left pulmonary vein were significantly higher than those for the right pulmonary vein (P < 0.05). Conversely, in the radiofrequency ablation group, the number of discharges for the left pulmonary vein was significantly higher than that for the right pulmonary vein (P < 0.05); and (4) when comparing sinus rhythm maintenance at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively, no statistically significant differences were noted between the two groups for paroxysmal, persistent, and paroxysmal + persistent atrial fibrillation cases (P > 0.05).
Conclusion
During the 6-month follow-up period, pulsed field ablation demonstrated comparable efficacy to radiofrequency ablation with respect to recurrence rates for both paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation. Moreover, pulsed field ablation exhibited high safety levels, excellent surgical efficiency, and a notably brief learning curve, affirming its viability as a therapeutic option for these conditions.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference22 articles.
1. Steinberg JS, O’Connell H, Li S, Ziegler PD. Thirty-second gold standard definition of atrial fibrillation and its relationship with subsequent arrhythmia patterns: analysis of a large prospective device database. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2018;11(7): e006274. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.118.006274. 2. Benjamin EJ, Muntner P, Alonso A, Bittencourt MS, Callaway CW, Carson AP, Chamberlain AM, Chang AR, Cheng S, Das SR, Delling FN, Djousse L, Elkind MSV, Ferguson JF, Fornage M, Jordan LC, Khan SS, Kissela BM, Knutson KL, Kwan TW, Lackland DT, Lewis TT, Lichtman JH, Longenecker CT, Loop MS, Lutsey PL, Martin SS, Matsushita K, Moran AE, Mussolino ME, O’Flaherty M, Pandey A, Perak AM, Rosamond WD, Roth GA, Sampson UKA, Satou GM, Schroeder EB, Shah SH, Spartano NL, Stokes A, Tirschwell DL, Tsao CW, Turakhia MP, VanWagner LB, Wilkins JT, Wong SS, Virani SS, American Heart Association Council on Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2019 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2019;139(10):e56–528. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000659. (Erratum in: Circulation. 2020 Jan 14;141(2):e33). 3. Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, Arbelo E, Bax JJ, Blomström-Lundqvist C, Boriani G, Castella M, Dan GA, Dilaveris PE, Fauchier L, Filippatos G, Kalman JM, La Meir M, Lane DA, Lebeau JP, Lettino M, Lip GYH, Pinto FJ, Thomas GN, Valgimigli M, Van Gelder IC, Van Putte BP, Watkins CL, ESC Scientific Document Group. 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS): The Task Force for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(5):373–498. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa612 4. Huang CX, Zhang S, Huang DJ, Hua W. Atrial fibrillation: current understanding and treatment recommendations—2018. Chin J Cardiac Pacing Electrophysiol. 2018;32(04):315–68. 5. Koruth JS, Neuzil P, Kawamura I, Kuroki K, Petru J, Rackauskas G, Funasako M, Aidietis A, Reddy VY. Reversible pulsed electrical fields as an in vivo tool to study cardiac electrophysiology: the advent of pulsed field mapping. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2023;20: e012018. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.123.012018.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|