Why the study?
Does the use of a pentaspline PFA catheter improve acute procedural characteristics and operator experience compared to variable-loop or fixed-loop circular catheters in patients undergoing first-time PFA for AF?
Population
450 consecutive patients undergoing first-time pulsed field ablation for atrial fibrillation, mean age 64.9…
Comparison
Pulmonary vein isolation with or without… vs Pulmonary vein isolation with or without…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
peri-procedural
Key result
The pentaspline PFA catheter was associated with higher first-pass PVI rates (97.3% vs 86.0% for variable-loop and 86.9% for fixed-loop; p<0.001) and shorter procedural times.
Authors
Loading...
May support PS technology for PVI; leaves open multicenter validation and long-term outcomes.
Observational (n=450)
Yes
Does the use of a pentaspline PFA catheter improve acute procedural characteristics and operator experience compared to variable-loop or fixed-loop circular catheters in patients undergoing first-time PFA for AF?
Absolute Event Rate: 97.3% vs 86%
p-value: p=<0.001
Among single-shot PFA systems, the pentaspline catheter was associated with shorter procedural times, higher first-pass PVI rates, and better operator ratings compared to circular catheters, with comparable safety.
Marcon et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation (n=450). Pentaspline (PS) pulsed field ablation catheter vs. Variable-loop circular (VL) and fixed-loop circular (FL) catheters was evaluated on First-pass pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) per patient (p=<0.001). The pentaspline PFA catheter was associated with higher first-pass PVI rates (97.3% vs 86.0% for variable-loop and 86.9% for fixed-loop; p<0.001) and shorter procedural times.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: