Introduction: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) remains the cornerstone in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). PVI using cryoballoon (CB) technology has emerged as a standard procedure in many centers. Recently, pulsed field ablation (PFA) has been introduced and used to achieve PVI. First data show high acute and favorable long‐term outcomes. So far, data comparing these new “single shot” devices are sparse. We sought to compare procedural and outcome data for first time PFA users versus CB in patients undergoing de novo PVI. Furthermore, potentially postprocedural discomfort and affection of autonomic ganglia were assessed.Methods and Results: A retrospective analysis and comparison of all de novo PVIs with PFA and CB was performed. Furthermore, PFA PVI learning curve was evaluated. During follow‐up, repeat outpatient visits and Holter electrocardiogram were performed to analyze arrhythmia‐free survival. Discomfort analysis was obtained by prescribed analgesic medication within first 48 h after PVI. Potential changes in heart rate (HR) between baseline and at 3‐month follow‐up were evaluated. A total of 108 patients (54 PFA and 54 CB; PFA; 33 (30%) female) with paroxysmal and persistent AF were analyzed. Type of AF was comparable (Patients suffering from PAF: PFA: 16 (30%), CB: 17 (31%), p = 1.0). In 107 (99%) patients, successful PVI was achieved. Transient phrenic palsy omitted complete PVI in one CB patient. A trend for a shorter overall procedure duration was observed in the PFA group (PFA: 64.5 ± 17.5 min; CB: 73.0 ± 24.8 min; p = 0.07). Excluding LA mapping time (first 14 cases), procedure time was significantly shorter using PFA (PFA: 58.0 ± 12.5 min, CB: 73.0 ± 24.8 min, p = 0.0001). Fluoroscopy time was significantly longer for PFA (PFA: 15.3 ± 4.7 min, CB: 12.3 ± 5.3 min; p = 0.001), but significantly less contrast medium was used (PFA: 12 ± 6 mL; CB: 51 ± 29 mL, p < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis of the PFA group revealed a significant shortening of procedure duration over time (first tertile: 72.7 ± 13.5 min, second tertile: 67.3 ± 21.7 min, third tertile: 53.4 ± 9.8 min, first vs. third tertile p < 0.0001). Two cardiac tamponades occurred in the PFA group (p = 0.495), of which one was most likely related to complex transseptal puncture. In the first 48 h after PVI, the number of prescribed analgesics due to postprocedural pain was equal between both groups (PFA: 7 (13%) patients, CB: 10 (19%) patients, p = 0.598). After a FU of 273 ± 129 days, 35 of 47 patients (74%) after PFA and 36 of 50 patients (72%) after CB PVI were free of any atrial arrhythmia (HR: 0.98, p = 0.88). Only in the PFA group, a significant increase in HR 3 months after PVI was observed (pre‐PVI: 61 ± 8 beats/min, post‐PVI: 65 ± 9 beats/min, p = 0.008).Conclusion: The new PFA technology is equally effective and safe as compared to CB for complete PVI with potentially shorter procedure time and significantly less contrast medium. However, AF recurrence rates after PFA PVI seem to be comparable to CB PVI.

Background: The newly introduced nonthermal pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a promising technology to achieve fast pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with high acute success rates and good safety features. However, previous studies have shown that very high power short duration ablation (VHPSD) is also highly effective and fast to achieve PVI with potentially less arrhythmia recurrence compared to conventional radiofrequency ablation. Data comparing PFA to VHPSD‐PVI is lacking.Objective: This study compared procedural and outcome data for PFA‐PVI to VHPSD‐PVI in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (PAF/persAF).Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing de novo PVI (PFA or VHPSD) were included in this analysis. For PFA‐PVI a pentaspline 20 electrode catheter was used. For VHPSD‐PVI an enhanced irrigated catheter with a power setting of 70 W/7 s (70 W/5 s at posterior wall) was employed in conjunction with electro‐anatomical mapping. All procedures were performed in deep analgo‐sedation.Results: A total of n = 114 patients (n = 57[50%] PFA, n = 17[30%] PAF; n = 40[70%] persAF) were included in this analysis. PVI was successful in all patients. The PFA group revealed a significantly shorter procedure duration (65 ± 17 min vs. 95 ± 23 min, p < 0.01) but longer fluoroscopy time (PFA 15 ± 5 min and VHPSD 12 ± 3 min; p < 0.001). At follow‐up after median 125 days (interquartile range: 109–162) n = 46 PFA (80.7%) and n = 44 VHPSD pts (77.2%) were free from atrial arrhythmia after a single procedure (p = 0.819).Two tamponades occurred in the PFA while in VHPSD two pts suffered groin bleedings. One clinically nonsignificant PV stenosis occurred in the VHPSD group.Conclusion: Pulsed‐field ablation and VHPSD‐PVI seem to be highly effective and safe to achieve PVI in the setting of PAF and persAF with comparable arrhythmia‐free survival. However, procedure duration for PFA PVI is significantly shorter and therefore may be of potential benefit. Compared to PFA VHPSD‐PVI might ensure information on left atrial substrate allowing to target concomitant secondary tachycardias.

Advanced ablation strategies are needed to treat ventricular tachycardia (VT) and premature ventricular complexes (PVC) refractory to standard unipolar radiofrequency ablation (Uni-RFA). Bipolar radiofrequency catheter ablation (Bi-RFA) has emerged as a treatment option for refractory VT and PVC. Multicentre registry data on the use of Bi-RFA in the setting of refractory VT and PVC are lacking. The aim of this Bi-RFA registry is to determine its real-world safety, feasibility, and efficacy in patients with refractory VT/PVC. Consecutive patients undergoing Bi-RFA at 16 European centres for recurring VT/PVC after at least one standard Uni-RFA were included. Second ablation catheter was used instead of a dispersive patch and was positioned at the opposite site of the ablation target. Between March 2021 and August 2024, 91 patients underwent 94 Bi-RFA procedures (74 males, age 62 ± 13, and prior Uni-RFA range 1–8). Indications were recurrence of PVC (n = 56), VT (n = 20), electrical storm (n = 13), or PVC-triggered ventricular fibrillation (n = 2). Procedural time was 160 ± 73 min, Bi-RFA time 426 ± 286 s, and mean Uni-RFA time 819 ± 697 s. Elimination of clinical VT/PVC was achieved in 67 (74%) patients and suppression of VT/PVC in a further 10 (11%) patients. In the remaining 14 patients (15%), no effect on VT/PVC was observed. Three major complications occurred: coronary artery occlusion, atrioventricular block, and arteriovenous fistula. Follow-up lasted 7 ± 8 months. Nineteen patients (61%) remained VT free. ≥80% PVC burden reduction was achieved in 45 (78%). These real-world registry data indicate that Bi-RFA appears safe, is feasible, and is effective in the majority of patients with VT/PVC.

Aims: Patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are at high risk for ventricular tachycardia (VT), and data on VT ablation in patients with LVAD are scarce. This multicentre registry assessed the mechanism of VT, procedural parameters, and outcome of VT ablation in patients with LVAD (NCT06063811). Methods and results: Data of patients with LVAD referred for VT ablation at nine tertiary care centres were collected retrospectively. Parameters included VT mechanisms, procedural data, VT recurrence, and mortality. Overall, 69 patients (90% male, mean age 60.7 ± 8.4 years) undergoing 72 ablation procedures were included. Most procedures were conducted after intensification of antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) treatment (18/72; 25%) or a prior combination of ≥2 AADs (31/72; 43%). Endocardial low-voltage areas were detected in all patients. The predominant VT mechanism was scar-related re-entry (76/96 VTs; 79%), and 19/96 VTs (20%) were related to the LVAD cannula. Non-inducibility of any VT was achieved in 28/72 procedures (39%). No LVAD-related complication was observed. The extent of endocardial scar was associated with VT recurrence. The median follow-up was 283 days (interquartile range 70–587 days). A total of 3/69 patients were lost to follow-up, 10/69 (14%) were transplanted, 26/69 (38%) died, and 16/69 (23%) patients were free from VT. Conclusion: Although often a last resort, VT ablation in patients with LVAD is feasible and safe when performed in experienced centres. These patients suffer from a high scar burden, and cardiomyopathy-associated rather than cannula-related scar seems to be the dominant substrate. Ventricular tachycardia recurrence is high despite extensive treatment, and the overall prognosis is limited.

Objectives: This study aimed to determine if changes in myeloperoxidase (MPO) levels correlate with response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and the potential role of MPO as a predictor of response to CRT. Background: CRT is a well-established treatment option in chronic heart failure (CHF) with 50–80% of patients benefiting. Inflammation and oxidative stress play a key role in CHF pathophysiology. Previous studies have demonstrated increased levels of MPO in CHF patients, but the correlation with CRT response remains incompletely understood. Methods: Fifty-three patients underwent CRT implantation. During follow-up, patients were divided into two groups, responders and non-responders to CRT, based on improved physical capacity and NYHA classification. Levels of MPO and NT-pro-brain-natriuretic-peptide (NT-proBNP) were determined prior to implantation, 30 and 90 days after. Physical capacity, including a 6-min walking-test, NYHA class, and LVEF were evaluated at baseline and during follow-up. Results: Thirty-four patients (64%) responded to CRT, showing improved physical capacity and LVEF. All responders revealed a significant decrease of MPO levels (503.8 ng/ml vs. 188.4 ng/ml; p < 0.001). Non-responding patients did not show any significant changes in clinical parameters or MPO levels (119.6 ng/ml vs. 134.3 ng/ml; p = 0.672) during follow-up. At baseline, physical capacity and NYHA class, as well as MPO levels differed significantly between both groups (p < 0.001). A ROC analysis identified an MPO cut-off value for response to CRT of 242 ng/ml with a sensitivity of 93.5% and specificity of 71.4%. There was a strong correlation between MPO and improvement of LVEF (Spearman’s rho: − 0.453; p = 0.005) and physical capacity (Spearman’s rho: − 0.335; p = 0.042). Conclusions: Response to CRT and course of MPO levels correlate significantly. MPO levels differ between responders and non-responders prior to CRT, which may indicate an additional value of MPO as a predictor for CRT response. Further randomized studies are required to confirm our data in larger patient cohorts.