ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2025
Outcomes With Pulsed Field Ablation Versus Conventional Thermal Ablation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness and safety of left atrial appendage electrical isolation in managing persistent atrial fibrillation: an updated meta-analysis of 3425 patients.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of Two Pulsed Field Ablation Systems for Atrial Fibrillation: One-Year Outcomes From a Multicenter Registry.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2026Article
- Pulsed Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Japan: Current Status and Future Perspectives.Circulation reports · 2026Review
- Pulsed field ablation vs. medical therapy for atrial fibrillation: a propensity score-matched comparison with the JoFib registry.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Outcomes With Pulsed Field Ablation Versus Conventional Thermal Ablation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Article
- Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Cancer-Associated Atrial Fibrillation: Who, When, and How to Manage Antithrombotic Therapy.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pulmonary vein isolation is a standard therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). Pulsed field ablation (PFA) has emerged as a novel approach aiming to improve efficacy and safety over conventional thermal ablation (CTA) (radiofrequency and cryoballoon). This meta-analysis evaluated outcomes of PFA versus thermal ablation in paroxysmal AF. Methods: Electronic databases were searched through May 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared the efficacy and safety of PFA versus CTA. The primary outcome was AF recurrence. Summary estimates were conducted using random effects. Results: A total of six studies, involving 1928 patients, were included. The incidence of AF recurrence was significantly lower among patients treated with PFA (risk ratio [RR] 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.85). PFA was associated with a lower incidence of any atrial arrhythmia recurrence (RR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.61-0.99). The total procedure duration was significantly shorter with PFA (mean difference -21.46 min (95% CI: -26.04 to -16.88)), but there was no difference in fluoroscopy time. The rates of esophageal injury and phrenic nerve palsy were lower with PFA. However, the data were limited for these two outcomes, and a meta-analysis was not conducted for them. There was no difference between the two groups in the incidence of stroke or pericardial tamponade. Conclusion: Among patients with paroxysmal AF undergoing catheter ablation, PFA is associated with favorable outcomes, including lower recurrence and shorter procedure time compared to conventional ablation modalities.
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.