Pulsed electric field, cryoballoon, and radiofrequency for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation: a propensity score-matched comparison.

Abstract

Pulsed field ablation (PFA) has emerged as a novel, non-thermal energy source to selectively ablate cardiac tissue. We describe a multicentre experience on pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) via the pentaspline Farapulse™ PFA system vs. thermal-based technologies in a propensity score-matched population of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) patients. Propensity score matching was adopted to compare PVI-only ablation outcomes via the Farawave™ system (Group PFA), cryoballoon (Group CRYO), or focal radiofrequency (Group RF) (PFA:CRYO:RF ratio = 1:2:2). Among 1572 (mean age: 62.4 ± 11.3 years; 42.5% females) PAF patients undergoing first time PVI with either PFA (n = 174), CRYO (n = 655), or RF (n = 743), propensity score matching yielded 174 PFA, 348 CRYO, and 348 RF patients. First-pass isolation was achieved in 98.8% of pulmonary veins (PVs) with PFA, 81.5% with CRYO, and 73.1% with RF (P < 0.001). Procedural and dwell times were significantly shorter with PFA, whereas the availability of a 3D mapping system led to a significant reduction in X-ray exposure with RF. Overall complication rates were 3.4% (n = 6) with PFA, 8.6% (n = 30) with CRYO, and 5.5% (n = 19) with RF (P = 0.052). The 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimated freedom from any atrial tachyarrhythmia was 79.3% with PFA, 74.7% with CRYO, and 72.4% with RF (log-rank P-value: 0.24). Among 145 repeat ablation procedures, PV reconnection rate was 19.1% after PFA, 27.5% after CRYO, and 34.8% after RF (P = 0.01). Pulsed field ablation contributed to significantly shorter procedural times. Follow-up data showed a similar arrhythmia freedom, although a higher rate of PV reconnection was documented in post-CRYO and post-RF redo procedures.