ArticleJournal of cardiovascular electrophysiology2026
Comparison of HEMOlysis Markers Among Three Pulsed Field Ablation Systems: HEMO-PFA Study.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPulsed field ablation (PFA) has emerged as a novel non-thermal modality for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. While hemolysis is a known complication of PFA, comparative data among different systems remain limited.
methodsWe prospectively enrolled 150 consecutive AF patients undergoing ablation with one of three PFA systems: FARAPULSE (FP), PulseSelect (PS), or VARIPULSE (VP) (50 cases each). Perioperative blood samples were collected pre-procedure, immediately post-procedure, and at 24 h. Hemolysis markers (LDH, LD2, indirect bilirubin, haptoglobin) and myocardial injury markers (CK, CK-MB, troponin T) were measured. Procedural characteristics and complications were compared across the systems.
resultsAmong 144 analyzed patients, VP was associated with the shortest procedure time (76 ± 27 min vs. FP 91 ± 25 min and PS 97 ± 26 min, p < 0.001) and fewest applications (23 ± 5 vs. FP 40 ± 6 and PS 56 ± 26, p < 0.001). Hemolysis markers increased in all systems, but the magnitude varied. ΔLDH was highest with FP (95.1 ± 49.4 U/L), intermediate with PS (62.6 ± 38.1 U/L), and lowest with VP (41.3 ± 26.7 U/L; p < 0.001). Haptoglobin decreased most with FP (ΔHp -56.5 ± 27.2 mg/dL), followed by VP (-41.7 ± 25.8 mg/dL) and PS (-28.3 ± 21.6 mg/dL; p < 0.001). Myocardial injury also differed: ΔTroponin T was lowest with VP (1545 ± 920 pg/mL vs. FP 2392 ± 1123 pg/mL and PS 2128 ± 1041 pg/mL, p = 0.002), with a similar trend for ΔCK (141 ± 92 U/L vs. 231 ± 138 U/L and 207 ± 119 U/L, p < 0.001). Complications included acute kidney injury in two FP cases and cardiac tamponade in one PS case.
conclusionsHemolysis and myocardial injury differ among PFA systems. FP was associated with the greatest changes, PS with the least hemolysis, and VP with the least myocardial injury. These differences may reflect variations in pulse output, electrode configuration, and tissue contact visualization.
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.