Why the study?
Does electroporation (pulsed-field ablation) reduce clinical arrhythmia recurrence compared to radiofrequency ablation in patients with left atrial macroreentrant flutter post-AF ablation?
Population
89 patients with left atrial macroreentrant flutter that appeared after or during an atrial fibrillation…
Comparison
Electroporation (pulsed-field ablation) (n=39) vs Radiofrequency ablation (n=50)
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
6 months and final follow-up (exact duration not specified)
Key result
Electroporation (pulsed-field ablation) significantly reduced arrhythmic recurrence at final follow-up compared to radiofrequency ablation (17.9% vs 44.0%, p=0.008).
Authors
Loading...
PFA may be associated with lower recurrence than RF; hypothesis-generating, requiring randomized confirmation before practice change.
Observational (n=89)
No
Does electroporation (pulsed-field ablation) reduce clinical arrhythmia recurrence compared to radiofrequency ablation in patients with left atrial macroreentrant flutter post-AF ablation?
Absolute Event Rate: 17.9% vs 44%
p-value: p=0.008
Pulsed-field ablation is associated with significantly lower rates of arrhythmic recurrence and improved flutter-free survival compared to radiofrequency ablation for left atrial macroreentrant flutter.
Martinez et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Left atrial macroreentrant flutter post-atrial fibrillation ablation (n=89). Electroporation (pulsed-field ablation) vs. Radiofrequency ablation was evaluated on Arrhythmic recurrence (including atrial fibrillation and left atrial flutter) at final follow-up (p=0.008). Electroporation (pulsed-field ablation) significantly reduced arrhythmic recurrence at final follow-up compared to radiofrequency ablation (17.9% vs 44.0%, p=0.008).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: