Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
August 4, 2025Journal of ArrhythmiaOpen Access

Pulsed‐Field Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

IEInês Martins EstevesVPVinicius Bittar de PontesTTThierry Fernando Trevisan

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Systematic review compares efficacy and safety of pulsed-field ablation with radiofrequency ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, suggesting similar outcomes.

Key Points

  • Pulsed-field ablation showed a significantly shorter procedure time compared to radiofrequency ablation by almost 40 minutes.
  • Fluoroscopy time was significantly longer for pulsed-field ablation, averaging around 10.75 minutes more than radiofrequency ablation.
  • Results included data from one randomized trial and five observational studies, involving 3163 patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
  • Efficacy and safety profiles over one year were comparable between pulsed-field and radiofrequency ablation procedures.

Cite This Study

Esteves et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/689a0f86e6551bb0af8d0b0ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/joa3.70158
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share