Arrhythmias & electrophysiology
Comparative 1-year outcomes of pentaspline versus circular array pulsed field ablation for pulmonary vein isolation with adjunctive atrial lines
Authors' conclusion
Pentaspline and circular PFA catheters demonstrate comparable safety, procedural performance, and 1-year clinical efficacy for PVI and LARA. These findings support the feasibility of comprehensive PFA-based atrial ablation strategies in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation and enlarged left atria.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing PVI with pulsed field ablation, with LARA in patients with persistent AF and left atrial enlargement (LA area >20 cm²), November 2023 to November 2024100 patients per group · Pentaspline 100 · Circular 100
- Participants
- 200 patients
- Comparison
- Pentaspline PFA catheter vs Circular PFA catheter
- Pentaspline PFA cathetern = 100
- Circular PFA cathetern = 100
- Outcome
- Freedom from atrial arrhythmia after a 3-month blanking period
- Follow-up
- 1 year
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Log-rank P = .90
Further findings
LARA performed
Median procedure time · comparable
P = 0.06
Fluoroscopy time · comparable
P = 0.203
Acute PVI and bidirectional block of all additional lines
- Achieved in all cases
- 100%
Safety
Overall complication rates
Overall complication rates
- Low and similar
Original publication
Comparative 1-year outcomes of pentaspline versus circular array pulsed field ablation for pulmonary vein isolation with adjunctive atrial lines. Heart Rhythm. Published 14 April 2026. doi:10.
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it