Key result
Monopolar PFA creates ~1.2 mm deeper endocardial lesions than bipolar PFA in swine models.
Why the study?
Current pulsed field ablation systems are optimized for atrial applications, and extending therapy to ventricular targets requires understanding lesion formation and key determinants of dose-response.
Does monopolar pulsed field ablation produce deeper ventricular lesions compared to bipolar delivery in a swine model?
Does monopolar pulsed field ablation produce deeper ventricular lesions compared to bipolar delivery in a swine model?
Absolute Event Rate: 8.3% vs 7.1%
p-value: p=.015
Monopolar PFA produces significantly deeper ventricular lesions than bipolar PFA, with depth increasing further at higher application numbers in the monopolar mode.
Monopolar delivery may produce deeper endocardial lesions than bipolar; leaves open optimal waveform selection for ventricular pulsed field ablation.
BACKGROUND: Given that current pulsed field ablation (PFA) systems have been optimized for atrial applications, extending this therapy to ventricular targets will require a deeper understanding of lesion formation and the key determinants that influence the dose-response relationship. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we systematically evaluate the impact of PFA waveform, application repetition, and the role of epicardial fat on lesion geometry in a swine model. METHODS: 14 swine underwent in vivo endocardial and epicardial ventricular PFA using the FARAPOINT™ (Boston Scientific) focal catheter. Endocardial ablations were performed using either the commercially available bipolar waveform or an experimental monopolar waveform with predefined application numbers (4, 6, or 8). Epicardial lesions, monopolar or bipolar, were created using 4 applications in targeted regions with and without fat. After a 1-week survival period, the animals were euthanized for histopathologic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 53 endocardial PFA lesions were analyzed. Lesion depth was significantly greater with monopolar (n = 23) compared with bipolar (n = 30) delivery (8.3 ± 1.6 mm vs 7.1 ± 1.4 mm; P = .015). Increasing the number of applications from 4 to 6 did not affect lesion depth. However, increasing to 8 applications resulted in a significant increase in lesion depth with monopolar delivery but not with bipolar delivery. A total of 23 epicardial PFA lesions were obtained. Lesion depth was significantly greater with monopolar compared with bipolar delivery (7.5 ± 0.9 mm vs 5.7 ± 0.7 mm; P < .001). The presence of epicardial fat did not appear to significantly affect lesion depth in either waveform configuration (monopolar: 7.8 ± 1.4 vs 7.0 ± 0.9; P = .37 and bipolar: 6.1 ± 1.3 vs 5.4 ± 0.7; P = .65). CONCLUSION: We systematically compare monopolar and bipolar ventricular PFA lesion characteristics beyond nominal application doses. Monopolar PFA produces deeper lesions compared with bipolar delivery. This effect is further enhanced by increasing the number of applications in the monopolar mode, whereas additional applications beyond 4 have minimal impact on lesion size with bipolar delivery. Notably, the presence of epicardial fat shows a trend towards lower lesion depth.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mdaihly et al. (2026) studied Ventricular ablation (swine model) (n=14). Monopolar pulsed field ablation vs. Bipolar pulsed field ablation was evaluated on Endocardial lesion depth (p=.015). In a swine model, monopolar pulsed field ablation produced significantly deeper endocardial lesions compared with bipolar ablation (8.3 vs 7.1 mm; P=0.015), an effect enhanced by more applications.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: