ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2026
Feasibility and acute results of a circular over-the-wire pulse field ablation catheter for pulmonary vein isolation and linear ablation lesions.
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. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePulse field ablation (PFA) is an ablation modality based on irreversible electroporation and is typically used to isolate the pulmonary veins in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). The safety and efficacy of PulseSelect PFA for other linear lesions is less well substantiated in the literature. We describe a novel use of this circular, over-the-wire PFA catheter for the ablation of the cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI), mitral isthmus (MI), and posterior wall isolation (PWI) as part of ablation for AF.
methodsData was collected prospectively on consecutive patients undergoing AF ablation using the PulseSelect catheter. CTI, MI, and PWI ablation was performed as based on patient factors and if there was documented atrial flutter. Acute bidirectional block was tested for both the CTI and MI, and isolation of the posterior wall was demonstrated during remapping. Continuous periprocedural ECG monitoring was performed. Patients underwent clinical follow-up at 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: 62 patients were included in this dataset. 61 patients had PVI, 52 patients had CTI ablation, 36 had MI ablation, and 38 had PWI. Successful PVI was observed in all patients where the veins were targeted. Acute CTI block was observed in 98% of cases. MI block was achieved in 94.4% of patients. Mean followup was 9.7 Months. Freedom from recurrence of AT/AF was observed in 85.5% patients. Recurrence was AF (8.1%), typical atrial flutter (1.6%), and atypical atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia (4.8%). A total of 857 lesions were delivered in close proximity to the right and left coronaries without prophylactic nitrates and no coronary spasm was observed.
conclusionsPFA using the PulseSelect catheter is feasible and acutely successful when targeting both the pulmonary veins and the CTI, MI and PWI. There were no major safety events observed directly relating to the catheter, and in particular no coronary spasm was observed. Longterm durability of the lesion sets remains unknown. The circular PFA PulseSelect catheter can be used to create linear atrial ablation lesions using the multiple techniques described. These data suggest it is safe when being used close to coronary arteries and no coronary spasm was observed. Acute success rates are encouraging but longer term followup is required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42538507What 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.