ArticleJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2026
Effect of Pulsed Field Ablation System and Post-Ablation Mapping on Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia worldwide and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Catheter ablation of AF has been shown to result in a significant reduction in AF burden and recurrence. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a new modality of catheter ablation that is noninferior to its thermal ablation counterparts, coupled with a more favorable safety profile. This study seeks to compare clinical outcomes between two PFA systems: PulseSelect™ (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) (circular catheter) and FARAPULSE™ (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA) (pentaspline catheter). Secondary aims are to evaluate the impacts of post-ablation mapping with a high-density mapping catheter (PAHDMC) and both procedure and fluoroscopy times on recurrence. Overall, across 895 patients with a median follow-up of 12.5 months, there was a recurrence rate of 39%. PFA system, PAHDMC, and procedure time all had no effect on recurrence. To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare recurrence rates between different PFA systems. Fluoroscopy time, however, was a significant predictor of recurrence. In the pentaspline catheter group, the odds of recurrence were 60% greater for every 15 min increase in fluoroscopy time. Future studies are needed to continue comparing outcomes amongst PFA systems and assess whether PAHDMC improves outcomes in PFAs.
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.