ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2026
Single-shot ablation for AF: Real-world procedural and one-year outcomes with the newly adopted PulseSelect PFA compared with cryoballoon from the 1STOP project.
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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is an established treatment for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). To date, cryoballoon (CB) ablation has been the most widely adopted single-shot approach, while pulsed field ablation (PFA) has emerged as a non-thermal alternative designed to preferentially ablate myocardial tissue and reduce collateral injury. PulseSelect™ is a CE-marked and FDA approved PFA system specifically developed for PVI. We compared acute and one-year outcomes of PulseSelect PFA versus fourth-generation cryoballoon (CB4) ablation in routine clinical practice.
methodsThis multicenter analysis included 254 consecutive patients undergoing first-time PVI in 10 Italian medium-volume centers between January 2024 and February 2025: 121 treated with PulseSelect and 133 with CB4. Baseline clinical and echocardiographic characteristics were prospectively collected. Procedural workflow, anesthesia strategy, procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, and periprocedural complications were assessed. Follow-up consisted of scheduled visits with rhythm monitoring, and arrhythmia recurrence was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.
resultsA total of 254 consecutive patients (mean age 62 ± 9 years, 28.3% women with paroxysmal AF in 76.4%) undergoing first-time PVI were included in the analysis: 133 treated with CB4 and 121 with PS PFA, with largely comparable baseline characteristics. General anesthesia was more frequently used with PulseSelect than with CB4 (74.4% vs. 16.5%). Mean skin-to-skin procedure duration was shorter with PulseSelect (62.4 ± 18 min) compared with CB4 (71.4 ± 30 min; p = 0.005), while fluoroscopy time was longer with PulseSelect. No acute complications occurred in the PulseSelect group; three transient phrenic nerve palsies were observed with CB4. At 12 months, no statistically significant difference in arrhythmia recurrence was observed between PulseSelect and CB4 (17.4% vs. 15.0%; p = 0.46).
conclusionsIn this real-world multicenter cohort, PulseSelect PFA and CB4 ablation showed excellent acute safety and no statistically significant differences in one-year arrhythmia recurrence were observed between the two treatment strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42400724What 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.