ArticleEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2025
Comparative study of nanosecond and microsecond pulsed field ablation for pulmonary vein isolation in preclinical models.
Article in 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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline 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
- Nanosecond pulsed field ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: feasibility, safety, and skeletal muscle activation.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 · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a Novel Multielectrode Surgical Pulsed Field Ablation Clamp: An Ex-Vivo Vegetal Study.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsNanosecond pulsed field ablation (nsPFA) has emerged as an alternative in atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. It leverages the alleviated muscle contractions (MCs) associated with nanosecond pulses, which may reduce complications and anaesthetic requirements compared with conventional microsecond PFA (μsPFA). To pre-clinically compare the safety, efficacy, and MC effects of nsPFA and μsPFA. METHODS AND
resultsTypical parameters were tested for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in swine using a novel commercial PFA system with either nsPFA or μsPFA protocols. Procedural outcomes and histological analysis were evaluated at 3-, 30-, and 90-day follow-ups. Electrical stimulation experiments were conducted using various pulse voltages and widths (ranging from nanoseconds to microseconds) to evaluate contractions in swine. nsPFA was non-inferior to μsPFA in terms of PVI safety and efficacy in the follow-up of 18 swine ablation procedures. Both protocols achieved consistent transmural and circumferential lesion creation without damaging adjacent structures such as the oesophagus or causing phrenic nerve block or paralysis. Additionally, nsPFA induced significantly lower MCs than μsPFA did in swine.
conclusionThe nsPFA protocol is a demonstrated potential approach for AF ablation, demonstrating comparable safety and efficacy to μsPFA, with reduced MCs. These findings suggest that nsPFA may offer an equally effective alternative, with significantly reduced MCs, which may translate to lower anaesthesia requirements.
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.