Key result
Pulsed-field ablation delivered near coronary arteries from within the great cardiac vein significantly reduced endothelium-dependent vasodilation compared with control (p<0.05) in a porcine model.
Why the study?
Reports of acute vasospasm and delayed stenosis following PFA raised safety concerns, but the effects of PFA on endothelial function and vascular integrity when delivered near coronary arteries remained unknown.
Does pulsed-field ablation delivered near coronary arteries induce acute endothelial dysfunction in a porcine model?
Does pulsed-field ablation delivered near coronary arteries induce acute endothelial dysfunction in a porcine model?
Pulsed-field ablation delivered near coronary arteries via the great cardiac vein induces acute localized endothelial dysfunction and loss, while preserving smooth muscle function.
GCV PFA may impair coronary endothelial function; leaves open clinical relevance for vasospasm or stenosis.
Background Reports of acute coronary vasospasm and delayed stenosis following pulsed-field ablation (PFA) have raised concerns about its vascular safety. Although coronary spasms are generally transient and responsive to nitroglycerin, the effects of PFA on endothelial function and vascular integrity remain unknown. In this respect, more knowledge is needed, especially when PFA is delivered in close proximity to coronary arteries, such as during cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI) ablation, ablation within the great cardiac vein (GCV), or epicardial PFA applications. Aim To evaluate the acute effect of PFA on endothelial and smooth muscle function in clinically relevant scenarios involving PFA application in close proximity to coronary arteries in a porcine model. Methods Landrace–Yorkshire–Duroc pigs (~50 kg, ~16 weeks old) underwent PFA using the CENTAURI generator with a focal monopolar biphasic waveform (25 A, 10 pulse trains) targeting the left anterior descending (LAD) and left circumflex (LCx) arteries through the great cardiac vein (GCV) (n = 9) and the right coronary artery (RCA) via the CTI (n= 5). After approximately 30–60 minutes, coronary artery segments were isolated post-ablation and mounted in a wire myograph to assess endothelium-dependent (using the endothelial agonist bradykinin) and endothelium-independent relaxation (using the NO donor nitroprusside). Coronary artery sections were sampled and processed in parallel for immunobiological analysis to assess vascular and endothelial integrity. Results In the LAD and LCx, the GCV-delivered PFA significantly reduced endothelium-dependent (bradykinin-induced) vasodilation compared with control (p < 0.05), whereas endothelium-independent (nitroprusside-induced) relaxation remained intact. Histological analysis demonstrated endothelial loss in the PFA-treated LAD/LCx segments, whereas the smooth muscle layer was still intact. In contrast, no significant alterations were observed in the structure or function of coronary arteries after CTI ablation in the RCA region. Both bradykinin-induced, endothelium-dependent vasodilation and sodium nitroprusside-induced, endothelium-independent relaxation remained intact. Conclusion PFA delivered near the coronary arteries from within the GCV, but not via the CTI, can induce localized endothelial dysfunction in the acute phase after the resolution of the coronary spasm. The preservation of smooth muscle cell function, which remains responsive to NO donors, explains why nitroglycerin effectively alleviates these spasms in the clinic. Further studies are needed to understand the long-term vascular consequences of endothelial damage of PFA when applied in close proximity to major coronary vessels.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mohaissen et al. (2026) studied Coronary endothelial dysfunction (n=14). Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) vs. Control was evaluated on Endothelium-dependent (bradykinin-induced) vasodilation (p=<0.05). Pulsed-field ablation delivered near coronary arteries from within the great cardiac vein significantly reduced endothelium-dependent vasodilation compared with control (p<0.05) in a porcine model.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: