Key result
Sphere-9 catheter reduces costs and improves outcomes vs conventional RF ablation for persistent AF.
Why the study?
Persistent AF imposes a major clinical and economic burden with poorer ablation outcomes than paroxysmal AF, motivating an evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of the novel Sphere-9 dual-energy catheter versus conventional RF ablation in the English NHS.
Does Sphere-9 dual-energy large-focal lattice tip catheter ablation improve cost-effectiveness compared to conventional radiofrequency ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation?
RCT
Does Sphere-9 dual-energy large-focal lattice tip catheter ablation improve cost-effectiveness compared to conventional radiofrequency ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation?
The Sphere-9 LFLT catheter is a dominant, cost-saving strategy for treating persistent atrial fibrillation compared to conventional RF ablation from the English NHS perspective, offering lower lifetime costs and higher QALYs.
May support Sphere-9 adoption for persistent AF; extends RCT data with NHS economic dominance.
Introduction Persistent atrial fibrillation (PersAF) presents a significant clinical and economic burden and is associated with poorer outcomes after catheter ablation compared with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). Pulsed field ablation (PFA) has emerged as a new form of energy modality for AF treatment. Sphere-9 is a novel dual-energy large-focal lattice tip (LFLT) catheter that is also capable of high-density mapping. The study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Sphere-9 catheter versus conventional radiofrequency (RF ablation for the treatment of PersAF in the English National Health Service (NHS) setting. Methods Individual patient data from the SPHERE Per-AF randomised controlled trial were used to estimate efficacy, safety and resource utilisation parameters in symptomatic PersAF patients. The cost-effectiveness model consisted of a hybrid decision tree (1-year time horizon) and a Markov model with 3-month cycle length (lifetime time horizon, 40 years) and was developed from the perspective of the English NHS. Unit costs were derived from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) clinical guideline for AF diagnosis and management (NG196) and NHS national cost collection data. Health benefits were expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and all benefits and costs were discounted at 3.5% per year in line with NICE requirements. Results LFLT ablation was found to be dominant compared with RF, since it was less costly and it produced greater health outcomes. LFLT was associated with an average cost of £15 433 and 8.26 QALYs per patient, compared with £20 861 and 8.20 QALYs for RF ablation. Results remained robust across all sensitivity and scenario analyses. Discussion The Sphere-9 catheter is a cost-saving strategy for treating patients with PersAF compared with conventional RF ablation. Given the growing burden of AF and limited healthcare resources, Sphere-9 presents a valuable option for improving patient outcomes while optimising NHS resource allocation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mellor et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in persistent atrial fibrillation. Sphere-9 catheter (LFLT) vs. conventional contact-force sensing RF ablation catheter (Thermocool Smarttouch SF) was evaluated on cost per patient and QALYs (null, 95% CI null, p=null). The Sphere-9 catheter is less costly and produces greater health outcomes compared to conventional RF ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: