ArticleCirculation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology2025
Pulsed Field Ablation-Related Hemolysis: Comparison Between Technologies.
Article in Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Hemolysis Risk, Renal Function, and Safety Among Two Pulsed Field Ablation Systems: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Review
- Clinical Advantages and Pitfalls of Pulsed Field Ablation: How to Prevent ALH Syndrome.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Review
- Multivessel Coronary Vasospasm Causing Cardiogenic Shock After Anatomically Remote Pulsed Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
- Haemolysis and renal effects across pulsed field ablation systems in atrial fibrillation.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
- Influence of dielectric perfusate on pulsed-field ablation-induced haemolysis.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
- Evolution of Energy Sources in Surgical Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: Current Technology and Future Directions.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Hemolysis in Pulsed Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Narrative Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Pulmonary Vein Isolation: Comparing different energy sources - independent or complementary use?Indian pacing and electrophysiology journalReview
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
backgroundHemolysis is a recognized side effect of pulsed field ablation (PFA). Severe hemolysis can lead to acute kidney injury, affecting the morbidity of patients undergoing PFA for atrial fibrillation. Here, we aimed to characterize the degree of hemolysis across different PFA technologies.
methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study of 552 PFA procedures performed in our center, where Hp (haptoglobin) was measured both at baseline and on postoperative day 1. The PFA catheters used were Farawave (59%), Sphere-9 (19%), Pulseselect (16%), and Varipulse (5.8%).
resultsHemolysis (ie, reduction in Hp >10 mg/dL) was observed in the majority of cases (95%), with the lowest incidence observed in patients undergoing PFA with Sphere-9 (88%) compared with Farawave (97%), Varipulse (97%), and Pulseselect (100%). Significant and severe hemolysis (ie, Hp-postoperative day 1 ≤25 mg/mL and Hp-postoperative day 1 ≤10 mg/mL) occurred in 34% and 13%, with a different distribution across catheter types: Farawave 46% and 21%, Varipulse 29% and 9.7%, Pulseselect 23% and 1.2%, and Sphere-9 5.5% and 0%. Hp decreased by a mean of 76±40 mg/dL from baseline, with a significantly greater degree of reduction seen with Farawave (94±40 mg/dL) and Varipulse (85±32 mg/dL) compared with Pulseselect (62±25 mg/dL) or Sphere-9 (39±23 mg/dL). There is a linear relationship between Hp reduction and number of PFA applications, with a decrease of Hp per application of 0.47 mg/dL (95% CI, 0.22-0.71 mg/dL) for Farawave, 0.40 mg/dL (95% CI, 0.09-0.73 mg/dL) for Pulseselect, and 0.10 mg/dL (95% CI, 0.02-0.19 mg/dL) for Sphere-9.
conclusionsPFA-induced hemolysis is common, with different PFA technologies exhibiting variable degrees of hemolysis, lower with the focal PFA catheter Sphere-9 when compared with single-shot PFA catheters.
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.