ReviewCurrent opinion in cardiology2025
Cardiac selectivity in pulsed field ablation.
Review in Current opinion in cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pulsed field ablation for the interventional treatment of atrial fibrillation: a scientific statement of the European Heart Rhythm Association of the European Society of Cardiology, the Heart Rhythm Society, the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society, and the Canadian Heart Rhythm Society.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026Guideline
- Intravascular haemolysis following pulsed field ablation pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review.Open heart · 2025Pooled it
- Transient phrenic nerve stunning during superior vena cava isolation after focal pulsed field ablation.HeartRhythm case reports · 2026Article
- Considerations on phrenic nerve and sinus node safety during superior vena cava isolation using a balloon-in-basket pulsed field ablation system.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- Focal-bipolar pulsed field ablation as a bailout strategy for radiofrequency-resistant atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Article
- Inflammatory and Myocardial Biomarker Response Following Pulmonary Vein Isolation: Cryoballoon Versus Balloon-in-Basket Pulsed Field Ablation.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2026Article
- Molecular Mechanisms of Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence After Successful Catheter Ablation.Cells · 2025Review
- Pulsed field ablation for paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2025Review
- Hemolysis Induced by Pulsed-Field Ablation of Atrial Arrhythmias: A Comparative Analysis of Current Systems.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2025Article
- Epidemiological characteristics of pediatric patients with burn complications and influence between 2016 and 2021: a multi-center retrospective study.Translational pediatrics · 2025Article
- Durability of Pulsed Field Ablation Lesions: Current Understanding and Future Directions.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2025Review
- Targeting atrial fibrillation in HFpEF: the emerging role of pulsed field ablation.Frontiers in physiology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThis review examines the selective cardiac injury induced by pulsed electric fields during atrial fibrillation ablation. It consolidates findings from both preclinical and clinical studies on cardiac selectivity and explores the potential mechanisms behind this selectivity. RECENT
findingsPreclinical studies indicate that pulsed electric fields cause significantly more myocardial injury compared with other tissues. Clinical studies have similarly shown that complication rates for pulsed field ablation are notably lower than those for radiofrequency and cryoballoon ablation. SUMMARY: Pulsed field ablation demonstrates a notable selectivity for myocardial injury, likely because of the unique functional and metabolic characteristics of cardiomyocytes. This review delves into the underlying principles of cardiac selectivity and proposes future directions for improving this selectivity. It is important to note that while pulsed field ablation shows promise, its cardiac selectivity is not absolute, as some complications still occur, necessitating further research.
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.