ReviewReviews in cardiovascular medicine2025
Advent of Pulsed Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: State-of-the-Art Review.
Review in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pulsed field ablation for the interventional treatment of atrial fibrillation: a scientific statement of the European Heart Rhythm Association of the European Society of Cardiology, the Heart Rhythm Society, the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society, and the Canadian Heart Rhythm Society.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 · 2026Guideline
- Heterogeneity in endpoints, monitoring methods and blanking periods in clinical trials of atrial fibrillation ablation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Pulsed Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Older Patients: An Observational Study at a Large Tertiary Centre in Australia.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel ablation technique for atrial fibrillation (AF). Indeed, PFA utilizes cell electroporation and exhibits selectivity for myocardial tissue, depending on the method used to deliver the pulsed electric field, potentially sparing surrounding non-cardiac structures. Recent clinical trials have demonstrated the non-inferiority of PFA compared with conventional thermal ablation for arrhythmia recurrence, including radiofrequency and cryoballoon ablation. Currently, large registry data present an acceptable safety profile. However, PFA is not without risk, and some unique, albeit infrequent complications have been recognized with this ablation modality, including stroke, coronary artery spasm, and intravascular hemolysis. Thus, given the associated safety, efficacy, and improved procedural workflow of this technique, the advent of PFA will likely lower the threshold for patient selection for AF ablation, particularly owing to the growing burden of AF in our community. This review provides an overview of the biophysics of PFA, various catheter designs, clinical trial and registry data, potential complications associated with PFA, and future directions in this promising area of AF management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.