ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2026
Repeat procedures after pulsed field ablation for atrial fibrillation: tertiary centre experience and meta-analysis of observational studies.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pulsed field ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation: meta-analysis of pulmonary vein isolation with or without posterior wall isolation.Scientific reports · 2026Pooled it
- Safety and Efficacy of Pulsed Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Older Patients: An Observational Study at a Large Tertiary Centre in Australia.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLimited real-world data exist regarding pulmonary vein (PV) and posterior wall (PW) durability after index pulsed field ablation (PFA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients undergoing repeat procedure.
methodsWe performed a single-centre retrospective observational study of consecutive patients who underwent repeat procedure for arrhythmia recurrence after index PFA for AF and a meta-analysis of published observational studies. All patients underwent index PV ± PW isolation with Farapulse/Farawave (Boston Scientific, US). Endpoints were incidence of repeat procedure and durability of PVI and PW ablation at repeat procedure. A meta-analysis was also performed evalutaing these endpoints following PFA with the same pentaspline catheter.
resultsOut of 751 index PFA procedure, 50 patients underwent repeat procedure (6.7%) at median 6.8 months (IQR 3.2–10.1). Arrhythmia recurrence was 48% AF, 36% AT/AFL and 16% both. Persistent AF at index ablation was associated with repeat procedure (p = 0.03). In 48 patients, PVs were durably isolated in 38%. Most common reconnection was RSPV (44%; 21/48), LSPV (40%; 19/48), RIPV (25%; 12/48) then LIPV (21%; 10/48). Superior PVs were more commonly reconnected than inferior PVs (p = 0.005). PW reconnection occurred in 70% (16/23). Meta-analysis of 6 further studies (n = 708) showed repeat procedure rate of 8.8% (95%CI 0.05–0.11). PVs were reconnected in 57% (95%CI 0.48–0.65) and PW reconnected in 55% (95%CI 0.39–0.71).
conclusionsThese real world data and meta-analysis show limited PV and PW durability in patients with arrhythmic recurrence undergoing repeat procedure after PFA for AF. Additional procedural strategies are needed to enhance lesion durability from PFA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41712165What 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.