Long-Term Outcome of Radiofrequency Versus Pulsed-Field Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Aged More Than 60 Years Undergoing Their First Catheter Ablation.
Pamela Horton Embrey, Sanghamitra Mohanty, Prem Geeta Torlapati, Vincenzo Mirco La Fazia, Carola Gianni, Yaseen Eleyan, Bryan MacDonald, Angel Mayedo, Amin Al-Ahmad, John David Burkhardt, John Allison, Weeranun Bode, G J Gallinghouse, Rodney Horton, Andrea Natale
{"title":"Long-Term Outcome of Radiofrequency Versus Pulsed-Field Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Aged More Than 60 Years Undergoing Their First Catheter Ablation.","authors":"Pamela Horton Embrey, Sanghamitra Mohanty, Prem Geeta Torlapati, Vincenzo Mirco La Fazia, Carola Gianni, Yaseen Eleyan, Bryan MacDonald, Angel Mayedo, Amin Al-Ahmad, John David Burkhardt, John Allison, Weeranun Bode, G J Gallinghouse, Rodney Horton, Andrea Natale","doi":"10.1111/jce.70101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We evaluated the impact of pulsed-field (PFA) vs. radiofrequency ablation (RFA) on long-term ablation outcome in AF patients and whether the benefit was extended to all age groups, in a real-world population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Consecutive AF patients undergoing their first ablation procedure were classified based on their age at baseline; group 1: > 60 years and group 2: ≤ 60 years. Each group were then subclassified based on the energy modality used; group 1A or 2A: received RFA, and group 1B or 2B: underwent PFA. All patients received isolation of PVs and left atrial posterior wall.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1386 patients were included in group 1 (Gr 1A: 954; Gr 1B: 432) and 414 subjects in group 2 (Gr 2A: 284; Gr 2B: 130). Patients in group 1 were sicker with more comorbidities. At the end of 1-year follow-up, significantly higher recurrence rate was reported in group 1 patients receiving RFA compared to PFA (249 (26.1%) vs. 45 (10.4%), p < 0.001), whereas the recurrence rate was comparable between the two subgroups in group 2 (RFA: 69 (24.3%) vs. PFA: 22 (17%), p = 0.095). Mean time to recurrence was significantly longer in the Gr. 2B (PFA) population compared to RFA (7.21 ± 1.87 vs. 7.75 ± 2.03 months, p = 0.008) and comparable in Gr. 1 (RFA: 7.98 ± 1.29 vs. PFA: 8.12 ± 1.80 months, p = 0.531). After controlling for the variables in the multivariate model, PFA was associated with lower risk (OR = 0.378, 95% CI 0.265, 0.539; p-value < 0.001) and Persistent AF with higher risk of recurrence (OR = 1.745, 95% CI 1.562, 1.986; p-value = 0.040).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PFA was associated with a significantly lower recurrence rate in patients > 60 years of age with more comorbidities compared to RFA. However, in patients aged ≤ 60 years, no difference in RFA vs. PFA in terms of recurrence rate was observed. Mean time to recurrence was comparable between PFA and RFA subgroups in the group 1 population, whereas it was significantly higher in group 2 PFA vs. RFA subgroup.</p>","PeriodicalId":15178,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.70101","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: We evaluated the impact of pulsed-field (PFA) vs. radiofrequency ablation (RFA) on long-term ablation outcome in AF patients and whether the benefit was extended to all age groups, in a real-world population.
Methods: Consecutive AF patients undergoing their first ablation procedure were classified based on their age at baseline; group 1: > 60 years and group 2: ≤ 60 years. Each group were then subclassified based on the energy modality used; group 1A or 2A: received RFA, and group 1B or 2B: underwent PFA. All patients received isolation of PVs and left atrial posterior wall.
Results: A total of 1386 patients were included in group 1 (Gr 1A: 954; Gr 1B: 432) and 414 subjects in group 2 (Gr 2A: 284; Gr 2B: 130). Patients in group 1 were sicker with more comorbidities. At the end of 1-year follow-up, significantly higher recurrence rate was reported in group 1 patients receiving RFA compared to PFA (249 (26.1%) vs. 45 (10.4%), p < 0.001), whereas the recurrence rate was comparable between the two subgroups in group 2 (RFA: 69 (24.3%) vs. PFA: 22 (17%), p = 0.095). Mean time to recurrence was significantly longer in the Gr. 2B (PFA) population compared to RFA (7.21 ± 1.87 vs. 7.75 ± 2.03 months, p = 0.008) and comparable in Gr. 1 (RFA: 7.98 ± 1.29 vs. PFA: 8.12 ± 1.80 months, p = 0.531). After controlling for the variables in the multivariate model, PFA was associated with lower risk (OR = 0.378, 95% CI 0.265, 0.539; p-value < 0.001) and Persistent AF with higher risk of recurrence (OR = 1.745, 95% CI 1.562, 1.986; p-value = 0.040).
Conclusion: PFA was associated with a significantly lower recurrence rate in patients > 60 years of age with more comorbidities compared to RFA. However, in patients aged ≤ 60 years, no difference in RFA vs. PFA in terms of recurrence rate was observed. Mean time to recurrence was comparable between PFA and RFA subgroups in the group 1 population, whereas it was significantly higher in group 2 PFA vs. RFA subgroup.
期刊介绍：
Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology (JCE) keeps its readership well informed of the latest developments in the study and management of arrhythmic disorders. Edited by Bradley P. Knight, M.D., and a distinguished international editorial board, JCE is the leading journal devoted to the study of the electrophysiology of the heart.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
