Abstract:Background: Evidence from clinical trials of early pulsed field ablation (PFA) systems in treating atrial fibrillation has demonstrated their promising potential to reduce complications associated with conventional thermal modalities while maintaining efficacy. However, the lack of a fully integrated mapping system, a staple technology of most modern electrophysiology procedures, poses limitations in lesion creation and workflow options. A novel variable-loop PFA catheter integrated with an electroanatomic mapping system has been developed that allows for real-time nonfluoroscopic procedural guidance and lesion indexing as well as feedback of tissue-to-catheter proximity. AdmIRE (Assessment of Safety and Effectiveness in Treatment Management of Atrial Fibrillation With the Bosense-Webster Irreversible Electroporation Ablation System), a multicenter, single-arm, Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study, evaluated the long-term safety and effectiveness of this integrated PFA system in a large United States-based drug-refractory symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation patient population. Methods: Using the PFA catheter with a compatible electroanatomic mapping system, patients with drug-refractory symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation underwent pulmonary vein isolation. The primary safety end point was primary adverse event within 7 days of ablation. The primary effectiveness end point was a composite end point that included 12-month freedom from documented atrial tachyarrhythmia (ie, atrial fibrillation, atrial tachycardia, atrial flutter) episodes, failure to achieve pulmonary vein isolation, use of a nonstudy catheter for pulmonary vein isolation, repeat procedure (except for one redo during blanking), taking a new or previously failed class I or III antiarrhythmic drug at higher dose after blanking, or direct current cardioversion after blanking. Results: At 30 centers, 277 patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (61.5±10.3 years of age; 64.3% male) in the pivotal cohort underwent PFA. More than 25% of the procedures were performed without fluoroscopy. Median (Q1, Q3) pulmonary vein isolation procedure, fluoroscopy, and transpired PFA application times were 81.0 (61.0, 112.0), 7.1 (0.00, 14.3), and 31.0 (24.8, 40.9) minutes, respectively. The primary adverse event rate was 2.9% (8 of 272), with the most common complication being pericardial tamponade. The 12-month primary effectiveness end point was 74.6%. The 1-year freedom from atrial fibrillation, atrial tachycardia, or atrial flutter recurrence rate after blanking was 75.4%. Substantial improvements in quality of life were observed as early as 3 months after the procedure, concurrent with a reduction in multiple health care use measures. Conclusions: AdmIRE confirmed the safety and effectiveness of the variable-loop PFA catheter, with short procedure and PFA application times and low fluoroscopy exposure. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT05293639.

A randomized controlled trial of pulsed field ablation versus standard-of-care ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the ADVENT trial rationale and design

Prospective Randomized Comparison Between Upgraded?2c3l? Vs. PVI Approach for Catheter Ablation of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: PROMPT-AF Trial Design

Pulmonary Vein Isolation with Optimized Linear Ablation Vs Pulmonary Vein Isolation Alone for Persistent AF: the PROMPT-AF Randomized Clinical Trial.

Rationale and Study Design for Ablation of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Guided by Ablation Index: a Multi-Center, Prospective Randomized Trial (PAF-AI Trial)

Pulsed Field Ablation to Treat Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: Safety and Effectiveness in the AdmIRE Pivotal Trial

Pulsed Field or Conventional Thermal Ablation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation

Prospective randomized comparison between upgraded ‘2C3L’ vs. PVI approach for catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation: PROMPT-AF trial design

Pulsed Field vs Conventional Thermal Ablation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: Recurrent Atrial Arrhythmia Burden

Pentaspline Pulsed Field Ablation Catheter Versus Cryoballoon for Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: Results From a Prospective Comparative Study

Rationale and Study Design for Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Intracardiac Echocardiography-Guided Minimal-Fluoroscopy Ablation in Patients with Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Non-Inferior, Multi-Center, Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial (PAF-ICE Trial)

Comparison of Cryoballoon vs. Pulsed Field Ablation in Patients with Symptomatic Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation (SINGLE SHOT CHAMPION): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

First-in-human clinical series of a novel conformable large-lattice pulsed field ablation catheter for pulmonary vein isolation

Pulsed Field Ablation for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: PULSED AF Pivotal Trial

Efficacy and safety of pulsed field ablation compared to cryoballoon ablation in the treatment of atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis

Autonomic Effects of Pulsed Field vs Thermal Ablation for Treating Atrial Fibrillation: Subanalysis of ADVENT

First-in-Human Experience and Acute Procedural Outcomes Using a Novel Pulsed Field Ablation System: The PULSED AF Pilot Trial

Efficacy of Ablation Index-Guided Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Patients with Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation.

Randomised clinical trial of cryoballoon versus irrigated radio frequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation—the effect of double short versus standard exposure cryoablation duration during pulmonary vein isolation (CIRCA-DOSE): methods and rationale

Pulsed electric field, cryoballoon, and radiofrequency for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation: a propensity score-matched comparison

Pulmonary vein isolation using pulsed field ablation vs. high-power short-duration radiofrequency ablation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: efficacy, safety, and long-term follow-up (PRIORI study)

Pulsed field versus cryoballoon ablation for atrial fibrillation: a real-world observational study on procedural outcomes and efficacy