Early and Mid-Term Outcomes of Pulsed Field Ablation in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Olexandr V.  Doronin; Maryna S.  Meshkova

doi:10.63181/ujcvs.2025.33(3).95-98

Olexandr V. Doronin Shupyk National University of Health Care of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3124-7084
Maryna S. Meshkova State Scientific and Practical Medical Center of Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery, Ministry of Health of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0009-0009-6575-7585

DOI: https://doi.org/10.63181/ujcvs.2025.33(3).95-98

Keywords: atrial fibrillation, pulsed field ablation, catheter ablation, pulmonary vein isolation, arrhythmia recurrence, learning curve

Abstract

Introduction. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is emerging as a safe and effective non-thermal approach for catheter-based treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). It selectively targets cardiac tissue while reducing the risk of collateral damage. In Ukraine, this technology was introduced in 2024.

Aim. To evaluate the early and mid-term outcomes of PFA in patients with different forms of AF treated at a single Ukrainian center.

Materials and Methods. A total of 48 patients underwent PFA between March 2024 and February 2025 using the FARAPULSE™ catheter. Remote follow-up data were obtained for 42 patients (33 with paroxysmal AF and 9 with persistent AF). All procedures were performed under general anesthesia following a standardized ablation protocol. For persistent AF, additional posterior wall isolation was performed. Key procedural metrics and rhythm outcomes were documented.

Results. The mean follow-up duration was 6.6 ± 3.4 months. Sinus rhythm was maintained in 78.7 % of patients with paroxysmal AF and in 66.7 % of those with persistent AF. Among the latter, 67.1 % continued antiarrhythmic therapy. No procedural complications were reported. Overall symptomatic improvement was noted in 81.0 % of patients. The efficacy rate aligns with international multicenter trials, such as PULSED-AF and INSPIRE.

Conclusions. Initial experience with pulsed field ablation in Ukraine demonstrates promising results for both paroxysmal and persistent AF. The procedure proved to be safe and effective, even during the operator’s learning curve. Continued research with extended follow-up and larger cohorts is warranted to validate long-term efficacy.

References

Verma A, Haines DE, Boersma LV, et al. Pulsed Field Ablation for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: PULSED AF Pivotal Trial. Circulation. 2023;147:1422–1432. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.063988
Ramirez FD, Reddy VY, Viswanathan R, Hocini M, Jaïs P. Emerging technologies for pulmonary vein isolation. Circ Res. 2020;127(1):170–183. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.120.316402
Metzner A, Reissmann B, Rausch P, et al. One-year clinical outcome after pulmonary vein isolation using the second generation 28-mm cryoballoon. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014;7(2):288–292. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.114.001473
Andrade JG, Monir G, Pollak SJ, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation using “contact force” ablation: the effect on dormant conduction and long-term freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation – a prospective study. Heart Rhythm. 2014;11(11):1919–1924. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2014.07.033
Stewart MT, Haines DE, Miklavčič D, Kos B, et al. Safety and chronic lesion characterization of pulsed field ablation in a porcine model. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32:958–969. https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.14980
Reddy VY, Calkins H, Mansour M, et al. Pulsed Field Ablation to Treat Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: Safety and Effectiveness in the AdmIRE Pivotal Trial. Circulation. 2024;150(15):1174–1186. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.070333
Reddy VY, Dukkipati SR, Neuzil P, et al. Pulsed field ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: 1-year outcomes of impulse, pefcat, and pefcat II. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2021;7(5):614–627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2021.02.014
Marc DL, Fink T, Mencke C, Schleberger R, et al. Pulsed‑field ablation‑based pulmonary vein isolation: acute safety, efficacy and short‑term follow‑up in a multi‑center real world scenario. Clin Res Cardiol. 2023;112:795–806. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-022-02091-2
Metzner A, Fiala M, Vijgen J, et al. Long-term outcomes of the pentaspline pulsed-field ablation catheter for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: results of the prospective, multicentre FARA-Freedom Study. Europace. 2024;26:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euae053
Duytschaever M, De Potter T, Grimaldi M, Anic A, Vijgen J, Neuzil P, et al. Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation using a novel variable-loop biphasic pulsed field ablation catheter integrated with a 3-dimensional mapping system: 1-year outcomes of the Multicenter inspIRE Study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2023;16:e011780. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.122.011780
Schmidt B, Bordignon S, Neven K, Reichlin T, Blaauw Y, Hansen J, et al. European real-world outcomes with Pulsed field ablation in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation: lessons from the multi-centre EU-PORIA registry. Europace. 2023;25:euad185. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euad185
Turagam MK, Neuzil P, Schmidt B, Reichlin T, Neven K, Metzner A, et al. Safety and effectiveness of pulsed field ablation to treat atrial fibrillation: one-year outcomes from the MANIFEST-PF registry. Circulation. 2023;148:35–46. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.064959
Reddy VY, Gerstenfeld EP, Natale A, Whang W, Cuoco FA, Patel C, et al. Pulsed field or conventional thermal ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2023;389:1660–1671. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2307291