Arrhythmias & electrophysiologySecondary analysis
Pulsed field ablation versus conventional thermal ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: 4-year outcomes in the ADVENT-LTO study
- Long-term follow-up of the ADVENT randomised trial
- extended follow-up
Authors' conclusion
Taken together, these data demonstrate that the favorable outcomes of PFA are maintained over the course of 4 years.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF)followed 1,332 ± 147 days
- Participants
- 364 patients
- Comparison
- Pulsed field ablation (PFA) vs conventional thermal ablation
- PFAn = 183
- Thermaln = 181reference
- Primary endpoint
- Treatment success
- Follow-up
- 4 years
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
4-year treatment success
P = 0.12
Further findings
| Outcome | PFA | Thermal | HR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Freedom from hospital-based arrhythmia intervention (prespecified) | 85.6% | 78.6% | 0.64 (0.38–1.05) | ||
| Progression to persistent AF (prespecified) | 2.6% | 4.6% | 0.55 (0.16–1.88) | ||
| 0.10.31310Hazard ratio (log scale) |
Repeat ablations
P = 0.04
Original publication
Pulsed field ablation versus conventional thermal ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: 4-year outcomes in the ADVENT-LTO study. Nat Med. Published 6 February 2026. doi:10.1038/s41591-026-04246-4
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it