Background: Pulsed field ablation is a novel nonthermal cardiac ablation modality using ultra-rapid electrical pulses to cause cell death by a mechanism of irreversible electroporation. Unlike the traditional ablation energy sources, pulsed field ablation has demonstrated significant preferentiality to myocardial tissue ablation, and thus avoids certain thermally mediated complications. However, its safety and effectiveness remain unknown in usual clinical care. Methods: MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-Approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) is a retrospective, multinational, patient-level registry wherein patients at each center were prospectively included in their respective center registries. The registry included all patients undergoing postapproval treatment with a multielectrode 5-spline pulsed field ablation catheter to treat atrial fibrillation (AF) between March 1, 2021, and May 30, 2022. The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from clinical documented atrial arrhythmia (AF/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia) of ≥30 seconds on the basis of electrocardiographic data after a 3-month blanking period (on or off antiarrhythmic drugs). Safety outcomes included the composite of acute (7 days) major adverse events. Results: At 24 European centers (77 operators) pulsed field ablation was performed in 1568 patients with AF: age 64.5±11.5 years, female 35%, paroxysmal/persistent AF 65%/32%, CHA ₂ DS ₂ -VASc 2.2±1.6, median left ventricular ejection fraction 60%, and left atrial diameter 42 mm. Pulmonary vein isolation was achieved in 99.2% of patients. After a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 367 (289–421) days, the 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmia was 78.1% (95% CI, 76.0%–80.0%); clinical effectiveness was more common in patients with paroxysmal AF versus persistent AF (81.6% versus 71.5%; P =0.001). Acute major adverse events occurred in 1.9% of patients. Conclusions: In this large observational registry of the postapproval clinical use of pulsed field technology to treat AF, catheter ablation using pulsed field energy was clinically effective in 78% of patients with AF.

Aims: Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a new, non-thermal ablation modality for pulmonary vein (PV) isolation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The multi-centre EUropean Real World Outcomes with Pulsed Field AblatiOn in Patients with Symptomatic AtRIAl Fibrillation (EU-PORIA) registry sought to determine the safety, efficacy, and learning curve characteristics for the pentaspline, multi-electrode PFA catheter. Methods and results: All-comer AF patients from seven high-volume centres were consecutively enrolled. Procedural and follow-up data were collected. Learning curve effects were analysed by operator ablation experience and primary ablation modality. In total, 1233 patients (61% male, mean age 66 ± 11years, 60% paroxysmal AF) were treated by 42 operators. In 169 patients (14%), additional lesions outside the PVs were performed, most commonly at the posterior wall (n = 127). Median procedure and fluoroscopy times were 58 (interquartile range: 40–87) and 14 (9–21) min, respectively, with no differences due to operator experience. Major complications occurred in 21/1233 procedures (1.7%) including pericardial tamponade (14; 1.1%) and transient ischaemic attack or stroke (n = 7; 0.6%), of which one was fatal. Prior cryoballoon users had less complication. At a median follow-up of 365 (323–386) days, the Kaplan–Meier estimate of arrhythmia-free survival was 74% (80% for paroxysmal and 66% for persistent AF). Freedom from arrhythmia was not influenced by operator experience. In 149 (12%) patients, a repeat procedure was performed due to AF recurrence and 418/584 (72%) PVs were durably isolated. Conclusion: The EU-PORIA registry demonstrates a high single-procedure success rate with an excellent safety profile and short procedure times in a real-world, all-comer AF patient population.

Aims: Initial clinical studies of pulsed field ablation (PFA) to treat atrial fibrillation (AF) indicated a >90% durability rate of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). However, these studies were largely conducted in single centres and involved a limited number of operators. We aimed to describe the electrophysiological findings and outcomes in patients undergoing repeat ablation after an initial PF ablation for AF. Methods and results: In the MANIFEST-REDO study, we investigated patients who underwent repeat ablation due to clinical recurrence—AF or atrial tachycardia (AT)—following first-ever PVI with a pentaspline PFA catheter (Farawave, Boston Scientific Inc.). At 22 centres, 427 patients (age 64 ± 11 years; 37% female) were included. Of note, the recurrent arrhythmia leading to the repeat ablation was paroxysmal AF (51%), persistent AF (30%), or AT (19%). At the repeat procedure, the PV reconnection rates were 30% (left superior pulmonary vein), 28% (left inferior pulmonary vein), 33% (right superior pulmonary vein), and 32% (right inferior pulmonary vein). In 45% of patients, all PVs were durably isolated at the beginning of the repeat procedure, with the previous use of any imaging or mapping modality being univariately associated with durable PVI. After a post-redo follow-up period of 284 (90–366) days, the primary effectiveness endpoint (freedom from documented AF/AT lasting ≥30 s after 3-month blanking without class I/III antiarrhythmic drugs or symptoms) was achieved in 65% of patients, with significant differences between groups (PAF 65% vs. PersAF 56% vs. AT 76%; P = 0.04). Persistent AF as recurrent arrhythmia after the initial PFA ablation predicted AT/AF recurrence after repeat ablation [hazard ratio 1.241 (95% confidence interval 1.534–1.005); P = 0.045]. The procedural complication rate was 2.8%. Conclusion: In repeat procedures for AF/AT performed after an index procedure with PFA for AF, PV reconnections are not uncommon. Repeat procedures can be performed safely and with an acceptable subsequent success rate.

Aims: The left atrial posterior wall is a potential ablation target in patients with recurrent atrial fibrillation despite durable pulmonary vein isolation or in patients with roof-dependent atrial tachycardia (AT). Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) offers efficient and safe posterior wall ablation (PWA), but available data are scarce. Methods and results: Consecutive patients undergoing PWA using PFA were included. Posterior wall ablation was performed using a pentaspline PFA catheter and verified by 3D-electroanatomical mapping. Follow-up was performed using 7-day Holter ECGs 3, 6, and 12 months after ablation. Recurrence of any atrial arrhythmia lasting more than 30 s was defined as failure. Lesion durability was assessed during redo procedures. Posterior wall ablation was performed in 215 patients (70% males, median age 70 [IQR 61–75] years, 67% redo procedures) and was successful in all patients (100%) by applying a median of 36 (IQR 32–44) PFA lesions. Severe adverse events were cardiac tamponade and vascular access complication in one patient each (0.9%). Median follow-up was 7.3 (IQR 5.0–11.8) months. One-year arrhythmia-free outcome in Kaplan–Meier analysis was 53%. A redo procedure was performed in 26 patients (12%) after a median of 6.9 (IQR 2.4–11) months and showed durable PWA in 22 patients (85%) with only minor lesion regression. Among four patients with posterior wall reconnection, three (75%) presented with roof-dependent AT. Conclusion: Posterior wall ablation with this pentaspline PFA catheter can be safely and efficiently performed with a high durability observed during redo procedures. The added value of durable PWA for the treatment of atrial fibrillation remains to be evaluated.

Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) has shown promising data in terms of safety and procedural efficiency for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), with similar long-term outcomes compared to radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and cryoballoon ablation (CBA) in patient with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) OBJECTIVE: To compare the procedural and long-term outcomes of patients with persistent AF undergoing PVI using PFA, CBA, or RFA. Consecutive patients with persistent AF undergoing a first PVI with PFA, CBA, or RFA were included. Patients underwent 7d-Holter-ECG at 3, 6, and 12 months post-ablation. The primary outcome was recurrence of any atrial arrhythmia after a 90-day blanking period. Safety outcomes included the composite of in-hospital major adverse events. A total of 533 patients with persistent AF underwent PVI using PFA (n=214), CBA (n=190), or RFA (n=129). Procedures with PFA guided by fluoroscopy were shorter compared to CBA (median 60 min, IQR 53-80 vs. 84 min, IQR 68-101, p=<0.001), and procedures with PFA in combination with 3D-electroanatomical mapping were shorter compared to RFA (median 101 min, IQR 85-126 vs. 171 min, IQR 141-204, p<0.001). Acute safety events occurred in 2.3%, 2.6% and 0.8% in the PFA, CBA and RFA group (p=0.545). The 1-year confounder-adjusted estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmias was 62.1% for CBA, 55.3% for PFA and 48.3% for RFA (CBA vs. PFA p=0.79, CBA vs. RFA p=0.009; PFA vs. RFA p=0.010). In patients with persistent AF undergoing a first PVI, 1-year confounder-adjusted outcomes are better with PFA and CBA compared to RFA.