Atrial fibrillation catheter ablation: electroporation against high-power short duration radiofrequency

Abstract

Abstract Background Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is one of the cornerstones of rhythm-control therapy for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. The new ablation technologies of pulse field ablation (PFA) and high-power short-duration radiofrequency ablation (HPSD) with the new QDOT® catheter have been recently introduced in the EP lab. Aims To evaluate and compare the efficacy, and safety of single-shot PFA and HPSDRA for PVI in AF symptomatic patients. Methods Single centre, retrospective study of consecutive patients undergoing PVI with PFA or HPSD between May-December 2022. Data on demographic, procedural and clinical/ electrocardiographic recurrence (assessed after a 3-months blanking period) were analysed. Comparative analysis between both techniques was performed. Results One hundred and ten consecutive patients were included (63 ± 11 years, 75% men), with a mean CHA2DS2-VASc score of 2±1 points, median LVEF of 61% [IQR 57-62%] and a median left atrial volume index (by CT scan) of 56 mL/m2 [IQR 51-67 mL/m2]. 55% patients presented paroxysmal-AF and 19 patients (17%) performed a redo ablation. 47% (n=52) patients performed HPSD and 53% (n=58) PFA (all with CARTO®3D system v.7 and high-density mapping). In the HPSD: median RF ablation time was 792 sec [IQR 614-919sec], while in PFA was 90 sec [IQR 30-138 sec]. Median time of catheter inside the LA for PFA was 18 min [IQR 2-33 min]. Comparing HPSD and PFA (Fig 1): median procedure time was similar (91 min [IQR 71-107 min] vs 89 min [IQR 66-111 min], p=0.261), while median fluoroscopy time was lower with HPSD (5.4 min [IQR 3.1-6.8 min] vs 13.2 min [IQR 10.3-15.6 min], p<0.001); posterior wall isolation (PWI) was performed in 5 (10%) HPSD vs 21 (37%) PFA patients (p<0.001). All PFA patients undergoing PWI had first pass isolation, while only 40% of HPSD had first pass isolation. When performed PVI only, PFA presents a lower median procedure time than HPSD (76 min [IQR 62-93 min] vs 97 min [IQR 69-135 min], p=0.048). There was only one major complication, a cardiac tamponade with PFA, treated with pericardiocentesis. At 3 months of follow-up, 17% (n=10) patients had clinical or electrocardiographic AF recurrence: 7 PFA patients and 3 HPSD patients (p=0.127). Conclusions PFA and HPSD were both feasible and safe. When undergoing PVI-only, procedure time was lower with PFA. In patients undergoing PWI, PFA achieved higher first pass isolation. Although still in its early real-world evaluation, both techniques seem to be efficient, providing low AF recurrence during follow-up.