{"title":"Esophageal Temperature Changes During Pulsed Field Ablation With Three Catheter Systems.","authors":"Kanto Saida, Takunori Aoyama, Hitoshi Hirano, Noboru Ichihara","doi":"10.1111/pace.70439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is considered less thermally injurious than conventional ablation technologies, but esophageal temperature elevation can still occur. Human data directly comparing esophageal temperature changes among different PFA catheter systems remain limited. We compared esophageal temperature changes during PFA using VARIPULSE, PulseSelect, and FARAPULSE.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective single-center study included consecutive patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who underwent pulmonary vein isolation using PFA with luminal esophageal temperature monitoring between April 2025 and March 2026. Esophageal temperature was measured at five sites every 0.5 s. For each patient, esophageal temperature rise (ΔT) was defined as the maximum esophageal temperature recorded during PFA minus the mean esophageal temperature during the 5-min interval immediately preceding the PFA application associated with that maximum temperature. A sensitivity analysis using the same ΔT definition was performed in patients who underwent pulmonary vein isolation alone.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 70 patients were analyzed. ΔT differed among the three groups and was greatest with VARIPULSE (1.61 ± 1.00°C vs. 1.10 ± 0.61°C vs. 0.88 ± 0.43°C for VARIPULSE, PulseSelect, and FARAPULSE, respectively; p = 0.0302). In patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation alone (n = 56), ΔT remained significantly different among the three groups (1.61 ± 1.03°C vs. 1.05 ± 0.61°C vs. 0.74 ± 0.38°C, respectively; p = 0.0386). Clinically significant temperature elevation (ΔT ≥ 2.0°C) occurred most frequently with VARIPULSE in both the overall cohort and the pulmonary vein isolation-only subgroup. Temperature elevation was most prominent during ablation near the left pulmonary veins and in anatomically adjacent regions to the esophagus. No patient developed symptoms suggestive of esophageal ulceration; however, systematic post-procedural endoscopic assessment was not performed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Measured esophageal temperature elevation during PFA differed according to catheter system and was greatest with VARIPULSE; this between-system difference persisted in patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation alone. Because procedural characteristics differed among systems, these findings should not be interpreted as establishing a device-specific causal mechanism or esophageal safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":520740,"journal":{"name":"Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.70439","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is considered less thermally injurious than conventional ablation technologies, but esophageal temperature elevation can still occur. Human data directly comparing esophageal temperature changes among different PFA catheter systems remain limited. We compared esophageal temperature changes during PFA using VARIPULSE, PulseSelect, and FARAPULSE.
Methods: This retrospective single-center study included consecutive patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who underwent pulmonary vein isolation using PFA with luminal esophageal temperature monitoring between April 2025 and March 2026. Esophageal temperature was measured at five sites every 0.5 s. For each patient, esophageal temperature rise (ΔT) was defined as the maximum esophageal temperature recorded during PFA minus the mean esophageal temperature during the 5-min interval immediately preceding the PFA application associated with that maximum temperature. A sensitivity analysis using the same ΔT definition was performed in patients who underwent pulmonary vein isolation alone.
Results: A total of 70 patients were analyzed. ΔT differed among the three groups and was greatest with VARIPULSE (1.61 ± 1.00°C vs. 1.10 ± 0.61°C vs. 0.88 ± 0.43°C for VARIPULSE, PulseSelect, and FARAPULSE, respectively; p = 0.0302). In patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation alone (n = 56), ΔT remained significantly different among the three groups (1.61 ± 1.03°C vs. 1.05 ± 0.61°C vs. 0.74 ± 0.38°C, respectively; p = 0.0386). Clinically significant temperature elevation (ΔT ≥ 2.0°C) occurred most frequently with VARIPULSE in both the overall cohort and the pulmonary vein isolation-only subgroup. Temperature elevation was most prominent during ablation near the left pulmonary veins and in anatomically adjacent regions to the esophagus. No patient developed symptoms suggestive of esophageal ulceration; however, systematic post-procedural endoscopic assessment was not performed.
Conclusions: Measured esophageal temperature elevation during PFA differed according to catheter system and was greatest with VARIPULSE; this between-system difference persisted in patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation alone. Because procedural characteristics differed among systems, these findings should not be interpreted as establishing a device-specific causal mechanism or esophageal safety.
背景:脉冲场消融(PFA)被认为比传统消融技术的热损伤小,但仍可能发生食管温度升高。人类直接比较不同PFA导管系统食道温度变化的数据仍然有限。我们使用VARIPULSE、PulseSelect和FARAPULSE比较PFA期间食管温度的变化。方法:这项回顾性单中心研究纳入了2025年4月至2026年3月期间连续使用PFA进行肺静脉隔离并进行管腔食管温度监测的非瓣膜性心房颤动患者。每0.5 s测量5个部位的食道温度。对于每位患者,食道温升(ΔT)定义为PFA期间记录的最高食道温度减去PFA应用前5分钟间隔内与该最高温度相关的平均食道温度。使用相同ΔT定义对单独进行肺静脉隔离的患者进行敏感性分析。结果:共分析70例患者。ΔT在三组之间存在差异,其中VARIPULSE的温度最高(分别为1.61±1.00°C vs. 1.10±0.61°C vs. 0.88±0.43°C,分别为VARIPULSE、PulseSelect和FARAPULSE; p = 0.0302)。在单独肺静脉隔离的患者中(n = 56), ΔT在三组之间仍有显著差异(分别为1.61±1.03°C vs. 1.05±0.61°C vs. 0.74±0.38°C; p = 0.0386)。临床显著的体温升高(ΔT≥2.0°C)在整个队列和仅肺静脉隔离亚组中最常发生。在左肺静脉附近和食管解剖邻近区域消融时,温度升高最为明显。无患者出现食管溃疡症状;然而,没有进行系统的术后内镜评估。结论:PFA期间测量的食管温度升高因导管系统的不同而不同,VARIPULSE最大;这种系统间差异在单独进行肺静脉隔离的患者中持续存在。由于不同系统的程序特征不同,这些发现不应被解释为建立器械特定的因果机制或食管安全。