Heart rhythm · 2025
Pulsed field ablation in the elderly by a pentaspline multielectrode catheter: Safety, efficacy, and comparison with cryoballoon and radiofrequency devices.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nakasone Kazutaka, Della Rocca Domenico G, Magnocavallo Michele, Betancur Andres, Vetta Giampaolo, Pannone Luigi, Sorgente Antonio, Audiat Charles, Rodriguez Jesus, Doundoulakis Ioannis, Nekic Andrija, Velagić Vedran, Polselli Marco, Mohanty Sanghamitra, Marcon Lorenzo, Sieira Juan, Ströker Erwin, Bala Gezim, Bianchi Stefano, Almorad Alexandre, Combes Stephane, Tsiachris Dimitrios, Sarkozy Andrea, Natale Andrea, Boveda Serge, Rossi Pietro, de Asmundis Carlo, Chierchia Gian-Battista, HRMC Investigators
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation is an effective treatment of atrial fibrillation. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) has emerged as a novel energy modality that relies on high-voltage electric fields to achieve cardiac tissue ablation. Data on its efficacy in the elderly are scarce.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the procedural details and clinical outcomes of PFA in patients >75 years old.
METHODS: Consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation >75 years old undergoing PFA with the Farapulse system were enrolled at 6 high-volume centers. Procedural details and clinical outcomes were compared with those of patients undergoing second-generation cryoballoon ablation (CBA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA).
RESULTS: Of 983 patients, 221 underwent PFA, 216 CBA, and 546 RFA. Procedure times were shorter with PFA (72 ± 30 minutes) compared with CBA (77 ± 27 minutes) and RFA (99 ± 23 minutes; P < .001). Extra-pulmonary vein ablation was performed in 74.2% PFA, 9.7% CBA, and 42.1% RFA (P < .001). The major complication rate was 1.01% (n = 10) and was not significantly different between groups (1 PFA, 2 CBA, and 7 RFA; P = .578). Minor complications were observed in 1.4% PFA, 5.1% CBA, and 3.5% RFA (P = .093). The 1-year atrial tachyarrhythmia freedom in the propensity score-matched population was 77.2% with PFA, 80.8% with CBA, and 74.9% with RFA; P = .52).
CONCLUSION: PFA is a safe and effective option for elderly patients, offering the advantage of enabling extra-pulmonary vein ablation without the concern of thermal injury risk.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the procedural details and clinical outcomes of PFA in patients >75 years old.
METHODS: Consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation >75 years old undergoing PFA with the Farapulse system were enrolled at 6 high-volume centers. Procedural details and clinical outcomes were compared with those of patients undergoing second-generation cryoballoon ablation (CBA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA).
RESULTS: Of 983 patients, 221 underwent PFA, 216 CBA, and 546 RFA. Procedure times were shorter with PFA (72 ± 30 minutes) compared with CBA (77 ± 27 minutes) and RFA (99 ± 23 minutes; P < .001). Extra-pulmonary vein ablation was performed in 74.2% PFA, 9.7% CBA, and 42.1% RFA (P < .001). The major complication rate was 1.01% (n = 10) and was not significantly different between groups (1 PFA, 2 CBA, and 7 RFA; P = .578). Minor complications were observed in 1.4% PFA, 5.1% CBA, and 3.5% RFA (P = .093). The 1-year atrial tachyarrhythmia freedom in the propensity score-matched population was 77.2% with PFA, 80.8% with CBA, and 74.9% with RFA; P = .52).
CONCLUSION: PFA is a safe and effective option for elderly patients, offering the advantage of enabling extra-pulmonary vein ablation without the concern of thermal injury risk.