{"id":7202,"date":"2025-05-29T10:50:54","date_gmt":"2025-05-29T07:50:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/jordan-cardiac.org\/?p=7202"},"modified":"2025-05-29T10:50:54","modified_gmt":"2025-05-29T07:50:54","slug":"pfa-linked-to-increased-risk-of-heart-damage-real-world-data-april-30-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jordan-cardiac.org\/en\/pfa-linked-to-increased-risk-of-heart-damage-real-world-data-april-30-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"PFA Linked to Increased Risk of Heart Damage \u2013 Real-World Data (April 30, 2025)"},"content":{"rendered":"<div>PFA Linked to Increased Risk of Heart Damage \u2013 Real-World Data (April 30, 2025)<\/div>\n<div>Source: JACC<\/div>\n<div><span> 1. Study Overview:<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Real-world data presented at Heart Rhythm 2025 and published in JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology show that pulsed field ablation (PFA), while increasingly popular, may carry higher risks of myocardial injury compared to traditional radiofrequency (RF) ablation.<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Study included 871 patients (mean age 68.9, 70% male) treated with either PFA or RF for atrial fibrillation.<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> 2. PFA Devices Used:<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Majority underwent PFA using FDA-approved systems from:<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Boston Scientific (Farapulse \u2013 70.9%)<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Medtronic (PulseSelect \u2013 14.1%, Affera \u2013 12.4%)<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Johnson &amp; Johnson (Varipulse \u2013 2.3%)<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> 3. Key Findings \u2013 Myocardial Injury:<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 PFA was linked to significantly greater elevations in cardiac biomarkers:<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 High-sensitivity troponin (cTn)<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH)<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Haptoglobin<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Changes were dose-dependent, suggesting that limiting energy delivery may reduce myocardial damage.<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Greater reductions in left atrial ejection fraction were also observed, indicating possible atrial stunning or dysfunction.<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> 4. Device-Specific Differences:<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 The Farapulse pentaspline catheter showed the highest biomarker elevations (cTn, LDH, and plasma free hemoglobin \u2013 PFH).<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 The Affera spherical catheter was also linked to elevated PFH levels.<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> 5. Clinical Outcomes:<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Despite these findings, major adverse outcomes were rare.<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Real-world adverse event rate was ~3%, slightly higher than previous trials (1\u20132%), possibly due to operator learning curve.<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> 6. Implications &amp; Future Directions:<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Authors stress the need for standardized monitoring protocols across PFA systems.<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 Results highlight opportunities to optimize catheter designs and dosing strategies.<\/span><\/div>\n<div><span> \u2022 More research is needed to understand both short- and long-term effects of PFA on the heart.<\/span><\/div>\n<div><a href=\"https:\/\/www.jacc.org\/doi\/10.1016\/j.jacep.2025.04.017\">https:\/\/www.jacc.org\/doi\/10.1016\/j.jacep.2025.04.017<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>PFA Linked to Increased Risk of Heart Damage \u2013 Real-World Data (April 30, 2025) Source: JACC 1. Study Overview: \u2022 Real-world data presented at Heart Rhythm 2025 and published in JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology show that pulsed field ablation (PFA), while increasingly popular, may carry higher risks of myocardial injury compared to traditional radiofrequency (RF) ablation. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7202","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jordan-cardiac.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7202","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jordan-cardiac.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jordan-cardiac.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jordan-cardiac.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jordan-cardiac.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7202"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/jordan-cardiac.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7202\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7204,"href":"https:\/\/jordan-cardiac.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7202\/revisions\/7204"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jordan-cardiac.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7202"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jordan-cardiac.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7202"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jordan-cardiac.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7202"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}