Comparison of 30-day readmission and same-day discharge rates in patients undergoing pulsed field vs radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: A multicenter analysis.

BACKGROUND

Pulsed field ablation (PFA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is noninferior to radiofrequency ablation (RFA) regarding efficacy. However, data on readmission rates have not yet been compared.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare rates of 30-day readmission, same-day discharge (SDD), and cardiac- or procedure-related readmissions among patients undergoing PFA vs RFA for AF.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter prospective analysis of patients undergoing PFA and RFA for AF in 2024 among 7 hospitals. The primary endpoint was the 30-day readmission rate. The secondary endpoints were rates of SDD and 30-day readmissions owing to cardiac- or procedure-related causes.

RESULTS

Among 697 patients, 345 underwent RFA and 352 PFA. Patients undergoing PFA had lower 30-day readmission rate (4.5% vs 11.0%, P = .002), higher SDD rate (80.4% vs 57.7%, P < .001), and lower cardiac- or procedure-related reasons for 30-day readmission (3.1% vs 8.4%, P = .0046), whereas noncardiac-related reasons were comparable in both (2.6% in RFA vs 1.4% in PFA, P = .396).

CONCLUSION

Ablation with PFA was associated with a significantly lower 30-day readmission rate, higher SDD rate, and a lower rate of cardiac-related readmissions than RFA. These findings have implications for health care costs, while reinforcing the safety and tolerability of PFA.