ReviewArrhythmia & electrophysiology review2024
Meta-analysis of Pulsed Field Ablation Versus Thermal Ablation for Pulmonary Vein Isolation in AF: A Broad Overview Focusing on Efficacy, Safety and Outcomes.
Review in Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Depression and anxiety disorders in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing a pulmonary vein isolation: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Pooled it
- Pentaspline Pulsed Field Ablation Versus High-Power Short-Duration/Very High-Power Short-Duration Radiofrequency Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2025Pooled it
- Indirect treatment comparison of two pulsed field ablation systems for the treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Trial
- Pulsed field ablation versus thermal ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2026Article
- TRUST-AF: comparison of conventional SL0 sheath exchange versus direct large-bore faradrive sheath access for fluoroscopy-guided transseptal puncture in pulsed field ablation.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Article
- Smoking and Risk of Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence After Catheter Ablation: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Article
- Pulsed Field Ablation Versus Thermal Ablation for First-Time Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Article
- Pulsed-field ablation versus thermal ablation for atrial fibrillation: an updated systematic review and meta -analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies with time-to-event analysis.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Review
- Real word data with no evidence for additional left atrial substrate modification at first PVI procedure in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation - Results from the German Ablation registry.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Article
- Safety, Efficacy, and Mid-Term Outcomes of Pulsed Field Ablation for Cavotricuspid Isthmus-Dependent Flutter: Real-World Data From a Major Health System Registry.Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology · 2025Article
- Pulse Field Ablation: An Update on Energy-Specific Adverse Events.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- Pulsed-Field Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Review
- The impact of empirical superior vena cava isolation in addition to pulmonary vein isolation on outcomes in atrial fibrillation - Systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2025Article
- Catheter ablation using pulsed-field energy: Advantages and limitations compared with conventional energy.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Review
- Anaesthesia for Pulsed Field Ablation Procedures.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recently established non-thermal, single-shot pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a potential tool for achieving rapid pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) to cause cell death by electroporation, yet data regarding this state-of-the-art technology remain sparse. In this meta-analysis, we included 3,857 patients from 20 studies. There was no significant difference in AF recurrence between the PFA and control groups. Subgroup analysis showed that additional ablation beyond PVI has a similar rate of AF recurrence to PVI alone (10% versus 13%, respectively). PVI durability was achieved in 83% (mean), 95% CI [65-99%] of the PFA group and in 79% (mean), 95% CI [60-98%] of the control group, with no significant difference in the rate of PVI durability between the two groups. The PFA group had considerably reduced procedure duration, but not fluoroscopy time. No statistically significant differences in periprocedural complications were observed. PFA is associated with shorter procedural time than thermal ablation. Cardiac complications were uncommon and mainly reversible in both the PFA and control groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.