ReviewEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2026
Sedation and anaesthesia in pulsed-field ablation for atrial fibrillation: mechanisms, procedural requirements, and real-world practice.
Review in 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, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) has rapidly emerged as an important energy source for atrial fibrillation ablation, offering tissue selectivity and procedural efficiency while introducing specific anaesthetic and sedation requirements. This narrative review examines the rationale for anaesthesia and sedation during PFA, the mechanisms underlying pain, involuntary movement, and neuromuscular stimulation, and the implications of catheter design, waveform characteristics, and patient-related factors for peri-procedural management. Available evidence indicates that both deep sedation and general anaesthesia can provide safe and effective procedural conditions when supported by appropriate monitoring, airway rescue capability, and experienced multidisciplinary teams. Deep sedation may offer advantages in workflow, recovery, and patient-centred care, particularly for standard pulmonary vein isolation procedures using contemporary biphasic systems with reduced muscle activation, whereas general anaesthesia remains appropriate for complex procedures, patients with substantial comorbidity, or settings in which complete immobility and airway control are essential. Current real-world practice is highly heterogeneous across regions and institutions, reflecting differences in regulations, staffing models, procedural complexity, and local expertise rather than a universally accepted standard. Overall, anaesthetic strategy in PFA should be individualised according to patient risk profile, expected procedural demands, and device-specific stimulation burden. Further prospective comparative studies are needed to define optimal sedation depth, standardise monitoring and outcome measures, and clarify how emerging technologies may enable lighter yet still effective sedation pathways.
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.