Comparing pulsed field electroporation and radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: Design and rationale of the BEAT PAROX-AF randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Using thermal-based energy sources (radiofrequency energy (RF)/cryo energy) for catheter ablation is considered effective and safe when performing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). However, treatment success remains limited and complications can occur due to the propagation of thermal energy into nontarget tissues. We aim to compare pulsed field ablation (PFA) with RF ablation in terms of efficacy and safety for patients with drug-resistant paroxysmal AF. METHODS: The BEAT PAROX-AF trial is a European multicenter, superiority, open-label randomized clinical trial in two parallel groups. A total of 292 participants were recruited in 9 high-volume European clinical centres in 5 countries. Patients with paroxysmal AF were randomized to PFA (FARAPULSE Endocardial Ablation System©, Boston Scientific) or RF using the CLOSE protocol with contact force sensing catheter (SmartTouch© catheter and CARTO© Biosense Webster). The primary endpoint will be the 1-year recurrence of atrial arrhythmia, and the major secondary safety endpoint will be the occurrence of acute (<7 days) procedure-related serious adverse events, or pulmonary vein stenosis, or atrio-oesophageal fistula up to 12-months. Additionally, five substudies investigate the effect of PFA on oesophageal safety, cerebral lesions, cardiac autonomic nervous system, durability of PVI as assessed during redo ablation procedures and atrial and ventricular function. The study began on December 27, 2021, and concluded recruitment on January 17, 2024. Results will be available in mid-2025. CONCLUSION: The BEAT PAROX-AF trial aims to provide critical insights into the optimal treatment approach for patients with paroxysmal AF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05159492.

Antibiotic-Resistance Profiles and Genetic Diversity of Shigella Isolates in China: Implications for Control Strategies.

The urgent need for comprehensive and systematic analyses of Shigella as the key pathogen led us to meticulously explore the epidemiology and molecular attributes of Shigella isolates. Accordingly, we procured 24 isolates (10 from Xinjiang and 14 from Wuhan, China) and performed serotype identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Resistance gene detection and homology analysis by polymerase chain reaction and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), respectively, were performed for genetic diversity analysis. All isolates were identified as Shigella flexneri, with 70% (35.4-91.9%) and 30% (8.1-64.6%) of the Xinjiang isolates and 85.7% (56.2-97.5%) and 14.3% (2/14, 2.5-43.9%) of the Wuhan isolates belonging to serotype 2a and serotype 2b, respectively. All isolates displayed resistance to at least two antibiotics and complete resistance to ampicillin. Multidrug resistance (MDR) was recorded in 70.8% (48.8-86.6%) of isolates, with Xinjiang isolates exhibiting relatively higher resistance to ampicillin-sulbactam, piperacillin, ceftriaxone, and aztreonam. Conversely, Wuhan isolates displayed higher MDR and resistance to tetracycline, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and cefepime relative to Xinjiang isolates. Molecular scrutiny of antibiotic-resistance determinants revealed that blaTEM was the main mechanism of ampicillin resistance, blaCTX-M was the main gene for resistance to third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins, and tetB was the predominant gene associated with tetracycline resistance. Four Xinjiang and seven Wuhan isolates shared T1-clone types (>85%), and two Xinjiang and one Wuhan isolates were derived from the T6 clone with a high similarity of 87%. Six PFGE patterns (T1, T2, T5, T6-3, T8, and T10) of S. flexneri were associated with MDR. Thus, there is a critical need for robust surveillance and control strategies in managing Shigella infections, along with the development of targeted interventions and antimicrobial stewardship programs tailored to the distinct characteristics of Shigella isolates in different regions of China.

Severe ST-segment elevation and AV block during pulsed-field ablation due to vasospastic angina - a novel observation.

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation using non-thermal electroporation represents a promising ablation modality due to its believed superior safety profile. Still, if electroporation is delivered in proximity to a coronary artery, vasospasms can occur. We report the first case of severe right coronary artery vasospasm resulting in ST-segment elevation and AV block despite a remote distance from the ablation site to the right coronary artery, indicating a different mechanism. In this case, electroporation most likely triggered a previously unknown Prinzmetal vasospastic angina in the patient, resulting in the coronary vasospasm. Thus, meticulous monitoring of ST-segment changes following PFA delivery even from regions remote to coronary arteries is required.

Pulsed-field vs. Cryoballoon vs. Radiofrequency ablation: outcomes after pulmonary vein isolation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) has shown promising data in terms of safety and procedural efficiency for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), with similar long-term outcomes compared to radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and cryoballoon ablation (CBA) in patient with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) OBJECTIVE: To compare the procedural and long-term outcomes of patients with persistent AF undergoing PVI using PFA, CBA, or RFA. METHODS: Consecutive patients with persistent AF undergoing a first PVI with PFA, CBA, or RFA were included. Patients underwent 7d-Holter-ECG at 3, 6, and 12 months post-ablation. The primary outcome was recurrence of any atrial arrhythmia after a 90-day blanking period. Safety outcomes included the composite of in-hospital major adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 533 patients with persistent AF underwent PVI using PFA (n=214), CBA (n=190), or RFA (n=129). Procedures with PFA guided by fluoroscopy were shorter compared to CBA (median 60 min, IQR 53-80 vs. 84 min, IQR 68-101, p=<0.001), and procedures with PFA in combination with 3D-electroanatomical mapping were shorter compared to RFA (median 101 min, IQR 85-126 vs. 171 min, IQR 141-204, p<0.001). Acute safety events occurred in 2.3%, 2.6% and 0.8% in the PFA, CBA and RFA group (p=0.545). The 1-year confounder-adjusted estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmias was 62.1% for CBA, 55.3% for PFA and 48.3% for RFA (CBA vs. PFA p=0.79, CBA vs. RFA p=0.009; PFA vs. RFA p=0.010). CONCLUSION: In patients with persistent AF undergoing a first PVI, 1-year confounder-adjusted outcomes are better with PFA and CBA compared to RFA.

First-in-Human Clinical Series of a Novel Conformable Large-Lattice Pulsed Field Ablation Catheter for Pulmonary Vein Isolation.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Pulsed field ablation (PFA) has significant advantages over conventional thermal ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). This first-in-human, single-arm trial to treat paroxysmal AF (PAF) assessed the efficiency, safety, pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) durability and one-year clinical effectiveness of an 8-Fr, large-lattice, conformable single-shot PFA catheter together with a dedicated electroanatomical mapping system. METHODS: After rendering the PV anatomy, the PFA catheter delivered monopolar, biphasic pulse trains (5-6 secs per application; ∼4 applications per PV). Three waveforms were tested: PULSE1, PULSE2 and PULSE3. Follow-up included ECGs, Holters at 6 and 12 months, and symptomatic and scheduled transtelephonic monitoring. The primary and secondary efficacy endpoints were acute PVI and post-blanking atrial arrhythmia recurrence, respectively. Invasive remapping was conducted ∼75 days post-ablation. RESULTS: At three centers, PVI was performed by five operators in 85 patients using PULSE1 (n=30), PULSE2 (n=20), and PULSE3 (n=35). Acute PVI was achieved in 100% of PVs using 3.9±1.4 PFA applications per PV. Overall procedure, transpired ablation, PFA catheter dwell and fluoroscopy times were 56.5±21.6, 10.0 ± 6.0, 19.1±9.3 and 5.7±3.9 min, respectively. No pre-defined primary safety events occurred. Upon remapping, PVI durability was 90% and 99% on a per vein basis for the total and PULSE3 cohort, respectively. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of one-year freedom from atrial arrhythmias was 81.8% (95% CI 70.2-89.2%) for the total, and 100% (95% CI 80.6-100%) for the PULSE3 cohort. CONCLUSION: PVI utilizing a conformable single-shot PFA catheter to treat PAF was efficient, safe, and effective, with durable lesions demonstrated upon remapping.

Difference between endocardial and epicardial application of pulsed fields for targeting Epicardial Ganglia: An in-silico modelling study.

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.

Application of a circular-shaped pulsed field ablation catheter with magnetic sensors for pulmonary vein isolation: a multi-centre clinical study report.

AIMS: A few studies have reported the effect and safety of pulsed field ablation (PFA) catheters for ablating atrial fibrillation (AF), which were mainly based on basket-shaped or flower-shaped designs. However, the clinical application of a circular-shaped multi-electrode catheter with magnetic sensors is very limited. To study the efficacy and safety of a PFA system in patients with paroxysmal AF using a circular-shaped multi-electrode catheter equipped with magnetic sensors for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). METHODS AND RESULTS: A novel proprietary bipolar PFA system was used for PVI, which utilized a circular-shaped multi-electrode catheter with magnetic sensors and allowed for three-dimensional model reconstruction, mapping, and ablation in one map. To evaluate the efficacy, efficiency, and safety of this PFA system, a prospective, multi-centre, single-armed, pre-market clinical study was performed. From July 2021 to December 2022, 151 patients with paroxysmal AF were included and underwent PVI. The study examined procedure time, immediate success rate, procedural success rate at 12 months, and relevant complications. In all 151 patients, all the pulmonary veins were acutely isolated using the studied system. Pulsed field ablation delivery was 78.4 ± 41.8 times and 31.3 ± 16.7 ms per patient. Skin-to-skin procedure time was 74.2 ± 29.8 min, and fluoroscopy time was 13.1 ± 7.6 min. The initial 11 (7.2%) cases underwent procedures with deep sedation anaesthesia, and the following cases underwent local anaesthesia. In the initial 11 cases, 4 cases (36.4%) presented transient vagal responses, and the rest were all successfully preventatively treated with atropine injection and rapid fluid infusion. No severe complications were found during or after the procedure. During follow-up, 3 cases experienced atrial flutter, and 11 cases had AF recurrence. The estimated 12-month Kaplan-Meier of freedom from arrhythmia was 88.4%. CONCLUSION: The PFA system, comprised of a circular PFA catheter with magnetic sensors, could rapidly achieve PVI under three-dimensional guidance and demonstrated excellent safety with comparable effects.

Impact of Left Atrial Posterior Wall Ablation During Pulsed-Field Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone is insufficient to treat many patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PersAF). Adjunctive left atrial posterior wall (LAPW) ablation with thermal technologies has revealed lack of efficacy, perhaps limited by the difficulty in achieving lesion durability amid concerns of esophageal injury. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare the safety and effectiveness of PVI + LAPW ablation vs PVI in patients with PersAF using pulsed-field ablation (PFA). METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of the MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) registry, we studied consecutive PersAF patients undergoing post-approval treatment with a pentaspline PFA catheter. The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from any atrial arrhythmia of ≥30 seconds. Safety outcomes included the composite of acute and chronic major adverse events. RESULTS: Of the 547 patients with PersAF who underwent PFA, 131 (24%) received adjunctive LAPW ablation. Compared to PVI-alone, patients receiving adjunctive LAPW ablation were younger (65 vs 67 years of age, P = 0.08), had a lower CHA2DS2-VASc score (2.3 ± 1.6 vs 2.6 ± 1.6, P = 0.08), and were more likely to receive electroanatomical mapping (48.1% vs 39.0%, P = 0.07) and intracardiac echocardiography imaging (46.1% vs 17.1%, P < 0.001). The 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmias was not statistically different between groups in the full (PVI + LAPW: 66.4%; 95% CI: 57.6%-74.4% vs PVI: 73.1%; 95% CI: 68.5%-77.2%; P = 0.68) and propensity-matched cohorts (PVI + LAPW: 71.7% vs PVI: 68.5%; P = 0.34). There was also no significant difference in major adverse events between the groups (2.2% vs 1.4%, respectively, P = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PersAF undergoing PFA, as compared to PVI-alone, adjunctive LAPW ablation did not improve freedom from atrial arrhythmia at 12 months.

Contemporary catheter ablation of complex atrial tachycardias after prior atrial fibrillation ablation: pulsed field vs. radiofrequency current energy ablation guided by high-density mapping.

AIMS: Catheter ablation (CA) of post-ablation left atrial tachycardias (LATs) can be challenging. So far, pulsed field ablation (PFA) has not been compared to standard point-by-point radiofrequency current (RFC) energy for LAT ablation. To compare efficacy of PFA vs. RFC in patients undergoing CA for LAT. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients undergoing LAT-CA were prospectively enrolled (09/2021-02/2023). After electro-anatomical high-density mapping, ablation with either a pentaspline PFA catheter or RFC was performed. Patients were matched 1:1. Ablation was performed at the assumed critical isthmus site with additional ablation, if necessary. Right atrial tachycardia (RAT) was ablated with RFC. Acute and chronic success were assessed. Fifty-six patients (n = 28 each group, age 70 ± 9 years, 75% male) were enrolled.A total of 77 AT (n = 67 LAT, n = 10 RAT; 77% macroreentries) occurred with n = 32 LAT in the PFA group and n = 35 LAT in the RFC group. Of all LAT, 94% (PFA group) vs. 91% (RFC group) successfully terminated to sinus rhythm or another AT during ablation (P = 1.0). Procedure times were shorter (PFA: 121 ± 41 vs. RFC: 190 ± 44 min, P < 0.0001) and fluoroscopy times longer in the PFA group (PFA: 15 ± 9 vs. RFC: 11 ± 6 min, P = 0.04). There were no major complications. After one-year follow-up, estimated arrhythmia free survival was 63% (PFA group) and 87% (RFC group), [hazard ratio 2.91 (95% CI: 1.11-7.65), P = 0.0473]. CONCLUSION: Pulsed field ablation of post-ablation LAT using a pentaspline catheter is feasible, safe, and faster but less effective compared to standard RFC ablation after one year of follow-up. Future catheter designs and optimization of the electrical field may further improve practicability and efficacy of PFA for LAT.

Ablation of accessory pathways in different anatomic locations using focal pulsed field ablation.

BACKGROUND: Ablation of accessory pathways (APs) is the cornerstone for treatment of patients with Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome and manifestation of atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a new type of nonthermal energy source delivered to the underlying tissue via the ablation catheter and used for ablation of arrhythmic substrates. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the efficiency and long-term outcome of ablation of APs of different localizations using a focal pulsed electrical field. METHODS: Electrophysiological study was performed in patients with indication for AP ablation. An ablation catheter was used to map the position of AP insertion. Pulsed electric field was delivered through a standard ablation catheter. In left-sided APs, the first ablation attempt was within the coronary sinus (CS). Patient follow-up was scheduled 1-3 months after the ablation. Additional check-up was performed after 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Fourteen 14 patients (3 pediatric) were treated. Termination of AP conduction was achieved in all procedures. The cohort consisted of 3 right free wall, 3 posteroseptal, and 8 left-sided APs. Ablation through CS was successfully used in 7 of 8 patients with left-sided APs. No complications were reported. Median follow-up was 5.5 months. Conduction recurrence through AP was documented in 1 patient. CONCLUSION: Focal PFA for AP shows promising results in terms of efficacy and safety. A high rate of successful termination of left-sided APs by ablation within CS may represent a new standard approach. The safety and efficacy profile of PFA seems to be transferable to the pediatric population.

Endocardial Pulsed Field Ablation and the Oesophagus: Are Atrio-oesophageal Fistulas Now History?

Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel energy form for the catheter ablation of cardiac arrhythmias, which uses electrical fields to mediate myocardial death via irreversible electroporation and other modalities. It is believed to offer relative tissue specificity, lowering - or even eliminating - the risk of complications associated with thermal energy, such as atrio-oesophageal fistulas. The proposed superior safety profile compared to thermal ablation has contributed to the enthusiastic implementation of PFA into clinical practice and is supported by early preclinical and clinical data. However, data about the effects of PFA on the oesophagus remain limited. This organ's susceptibility to PFA has important clinical ramifications and there are two highly relevant questions. First, is the oesophagus absolutely spared by PFA or is there susceptibility to injury at higher field strengths? Second, if oesophageal injury can occur, can atrio-oesophageal fistulas ensue? The aim of this article is to provide a literature review on the effects of PFA on the oesophagus and to address these questions based on the data described.

Meta-analysis of pulsed-field ablation versus cryoablation for atrial fibrillation.

PURPOSE: The available data on the treatment strategy of pulsed field ablation (PFA) for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is limited. This study aims to provide a comparative analysis of the efficacy, safety, and procedural efficiency between PFA and cryoballoon ablation (CBA) for AF. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of the EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases to identify trials comparing PFA with CBA for AF from their inception until December 2023. The odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD), along with a 95% confidence interval (CI), were utilized as measures of treatment effect. RESULTS: The analysis included 15 eligible trials with a total enrollment of 1880 patients. No significant differences were found in recurrent atrial arrhythmia (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.64, 1.07) or periprocedural complications (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.46, 1.30) between the two ablation techniques examined in this study. However, the PFA technique demonstrated a significantly shorter procedure time (MD -7.17, 95% CI -13.60, -0.73), but a longer fluoroscopy time (MD 2.53, 95% CI 0.87, 4.19). Similarly, PFA was found to be significantly associated with a decreased incidence of phrenic nerve palsy (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07, 0.59), but an increased incidence of cardiac tamponade (OR 4.07, 95% CI 1.15, 14.39). Moreover, there was a significantly higher release of troponin with PFA compared to CBA (MD 470.28, 95% CI 18.89, 921.67), while the increase in S100 protein and heart rate was significantly lower with PFA than with CBA (MD -64.41, 95% CI -105.46, -17.36), (MD -8.76, 95% CI -15.12, -2.40). CONCLUSION: The utilization of PFA provides a safer, time-saving, and tissue-specific procedure compared to CBA, while maintaining comparable success rates. This has the potential to enhance procedural efficiency and optimize resource utilization in clinical practice. These findings underscore the feasibility and promise of PFA as an alternative technique for PVI in patients with AF.