Pulmonaalvenenstenose na PFA versus thermale ablatie: vergelijking

AIMS: When it occurs, pulmonary vein (PV) stenosis after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is associated with significant morbidity. Even mild-to-moderate PV narrowing may have long-term implications. Unlike thermal ablation energies, such as radiofrequency (RF) or cryothermy, pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a non-thermal modality associated with less fibrotic proliferation. Herein, we compared the effects of PFA vs. thermal ablation on PV narrowing after AF ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS: ADVENT was a multi-centre, randomized, single-blind study comparing PFA (pentaspline catheter) with thermal ablation-force-sensing RF or cryoballoon (CB)-to treat drug-refractory paroxysmal AF. Pulmonary vein diameter and aggregate cross-sectional area were obtained by baseline and 3-month imaging. The pre-specified, formally tested, secondary safety endpoint compared a measure of PV narrowing between PFA vs. thermal groups, with superiority defined by posterior probability > 0.975. Among subjects randomized to PFA (n = 305) or thermal ablation (n = 302), 259 PFA and 255 thermal ablation (137 RF and 118 CB) subjects had complete baseline and 3-month PV imaging. No subject had significant (≥70%) PV stenosis. Change in aggregate PV cross-sectional area was less with PFA (-0.9%) than thermal ablation (-12%, posterior probability > 0.999)-primarily driven by the RF sub-cohort (-19.5%) vs. CB sub-cohort (-3.3%). Almost half of all PFA PV diameters did not decrease, but the majority (80%) of RF PVs decreased, regardless of PV anatomic location. CONCLUSION: In this first randomized comparison of PFA vs. thermal ablation, PFA resulted in less PV narrowing-thereby underscoring the qualitatively differential and favourable impact of PFA on PV tissue.