What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Observational. Population: Ventricular arrhythmias (idiopathic RVOT PVCs and scar-related VTs) (n=12). Intervention: Pulsed field ablation with pentaspline catheter. Primary outcome: Acute procedural success (95% CI 62%-100%).

July 7, 2025Frontiers in Cardiovascular MedicineOpen Access

Pulsed field ablation for ventricular arrhythmias with pentaspline catheter

Q: What does this research mean for the field?

Pulsed field ablation with a pentaspline catheter is feasible and achieves an acute procedural success rate of 92% in patients with idiopathic RVOT PVCs and scar-related ventricular tachycardias. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.INCREMENTAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

Pentaspline PFA achieves 92% acute procedural success in RVOT PVCs and scar-related VTs.

95% CI 62%-100%
n=12

Why the study?

Pulsed-field energy may penetrate deeper into scarred tissue than thermal energies, but evidence regarding its role in treating ventricular arrhythmias is limited.

Does pulsed field ablation with a pentaspline catheter effectively treat ventricular arrhythmias in patients with idiopathic RVOT PVCs or scar-related VTs?

Comparison

PFA with pentaspline catheter (Farapulse system)

Design

Prospective cohort study

Follow-up

Mean 100 (97-140) days

Authors

APAnna PadisákUniversitair Ziekenhuis Brussel NSNándor SzegediElectrophysiology ETEdit TanaiSemmelweis University

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Should not yet change ablation practice; leaves open pulsed field ablation efficacy for ventricular arrhythmias pending larger studies.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=12)

Multicenter

Structured PICO

Does pulsed field ablation with a pentaspline catheter effectively treat ventricular arrhythmias in patients with idiopathic RVOT PVCs or scar-related VTs?

Population

12 patients (mean age 51, 25% female) with idiopathic RVOT PVCs or scar-related VTs undergoing pulsed field ablation, followed for a mean of 100 days.

Intervention

Pulsed field ablation (PFA) using the FARAPULSE system with a pentaspline single-shot catheter (FARAWAVE), delivered in basket or flower configuration.

Outcome

Acute procedural success (complete elimination of PVCs or non-inducibility of VTs) and mid-term success (overall <1% PVC burden or VT-free survival at >3 months).

Pulsed field ablation using a pentaspline catheter is feasible and shows good acute and mid-term efficacy for treating idiopathic RVOT PVCs and scar-related VTs.

Limitations

Findings cannot be extrapolated to other PFA systems.
Small sample size limits conclusions on safety and long-term efficacy.
Patients with VT but no structural heart disease were excluded.
Small sample size
Findings cannot be extrapolated to other PFA systems
Patients with VT but no structural heart disease were excluded
Short follow-up period

Cite This Study

Padisák et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Ventricular arrhythmias (idiopathic RVOT PVCs and scar-related VTs) (n=12). Pulsed field ablation with pentaspline catheter was evaluated on Acute procedural success (95% CI 62%-100%). Pulsed field ablation with a pentaspline catheter achieved acute procedural success in 92% of patients with idiopathic RVOT PVCs and scar-related VTs.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a2082c115df8032213e8f96 https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2025.1631253

Topics

Ventricular arrhythmias AF ablation outcomes

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Pulsed field ablation for ventricular arrhythmias with pentaspline catheter

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Study Design

Structured PICO

Limitations

Cite This Study

Topics

Pulsed field ablation for ventricular arrhythmias with pentaspline catheter

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Study Design

Structured PICO

Limitations

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Topics

Also Consider