Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41169978›Full record

ArticleHeart rhythm O22025

Comparison of room times between pulsed-field ablation and very high-power short-duration ablation.

Gábor Orbán, Márton Boga, Zoltán Salló, István Osztheimer, Klaudia Vivien Nagy, Péter Perge, Edit Tanai, Bence Czumbel, Bertalan Bakán, Ferenc Komlósi and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Impact of pulsed field vs. radiofrequency on atrial fibrillation ablation workflow and organization: a single high-volume centre experience.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 · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Gábor OrbánHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Márton BogaHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Zoltán SallóHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
István OsztheimerHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Klaudia Vivien NagyHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Péter PergeHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Edit TanaiHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Bence CzumbelHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Bertalan BakánHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Ferenc KomlósiHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Patrik TóthHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Arnold Béla FerenczHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Béla MerkelyHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
László GellérHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Nándor SzegediHeart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) has shown promise in improving atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation efficiency by reducing skin-to-skin procedure times while maintaining safety compared with advanced radiofrequency methods such as very high-power short-duration (vHPSD) ablation. Although PFA requires deeper sedation, its effect on total time spent in the operating room is unknown. Objective: We aimed to compare the room time (the time between operating room entry and exit) and procedural subsections' times of PFA and vHPSD procedures. Methods: We enrolled consecutive patients who underwent PFA or vHPSD ablation at our center. Room and procedural subsections' times were analyzed. Recurrence rates at 6 months were also compared. Results: We included 131 patients (66 [55-71] years, 86 [65.6%] had paroxysmal AF). Eighty-seven patients (66%) underwent PFA, and 44 (34%) underwent vHPSD ablation. PFA outperformed vHPSD in terms of room time (71 [64-80] vs 88 [75-99.8] minutes, Conclusion: In AF ablation, PFA results in significantly shorter room time than vHPSD, while maintaining similar 6-month recurrence rates. PFA may enhance time efficiency in the electrophysiology laboratory, even compared with the fastest radiofrequency technology.

Indexed as

Atrial fibrillationProcedural efficiencyPulsed-field ablationRoom timeTime managementVery high-power short-duration ablation

Identifiers

PMID41169978
PMCPMC12570189

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.