ArticleHeart rhythm O22025
Impact of electrode-tissue proximity on formation of pulsed field ablation lesions: Using multi-electrode impedance measurements.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ventricular pulsed field ablation from bench to bedside: preclinical and clinical evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis.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 · 2026Pooled it
- Impact of contact parameters on lesion dimensions during circular Pulsed-Field ablation in ex vivo and in vivo models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Complications of pulsed-field ablation for atrial fibrillation: a narrative structured review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Complexity and Perplexity of Pulsed Field Ablation: An Engineering Perspective.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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: For pulsed field ablation (PFA), the effect of electrode-tissue contact or proximity remains unclear. Objective: In this porcine study, the effect of electrode-tissue proximity was studied after 3 weeks of follow-up, using a custom device in which the electrode-tissue distance could be varied for every electrode. Methods: An impedance-based method was used to determine electrode-tissue proximity or contact. During a bench experiment, the relation between contact value per electrode and electrode-tissue distance was studied. In addition, in 10 pigs epicardial ablation using a custom 6-polar linear ablation device was performed using bipolar, biphasic deliveries on randomized locations on the heart. After 3 weeks, macroscopic analysis was used to compare lesion width for left vs right ventricle. Based on histology, the lesion area and depth were related to electrode-tissue contact. Results: Analysis of 96 bench measurements showed a decrease in tissue-proximity index with increasing distance. Lesions on the right ventricle were wider compared to the lesions on the left ventricle, 9.0 ± 1.9 mm vs 6.5 ± 1.0 mm ( Conclusion: This study shows that higher electrode-tissue proximity may result in deeper PFA lesions, and is, therefore, an important parameter in improving PFA lesions. Therefore, confirmation of tissue contact using impedance-based measurements may improve PFA ablation efficacy in a clinical setting.
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.