Key result
Pulsed field ablation lesion durability relies on standardized delivery and positioning over conventional thermal electrogram markers.
Why the study?
Although pulsed field ablation (PFA) has a favourable safety profile and preferential myocardial tissue ablation for treating cardiac arrhythmias, procedural control of lesion formation and reliable assessment of lesion durability remain important challenges.
This review highlights that because conventional thermal ablation markers poorly predict durable pulsed field ablation lesions, current workflows must rely on standardized energy protocols, optimized catheter-tissue contact, and imaging or mapping guidance while awaiting validated real-time markers of irreversible electroporation.
Pulsed field ablation (PFA) has rapidly emerged as a promising ablation modality for the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias because of its myocardial tissue preferential ablation and favourable safety profile. However, procedural control of lesion formation and reliable assessment of lesion durability remain important challenges. This review summarizes the main determinants of PFA efficacy and current approaches for intraprocedural lesion assessment. Experimental and clinical studies indicate that PFA lesion formation results from the interaction between delivered electrical energy, catheter design, tissue coupling, and application strategy. Lesion size and geometry are primarily determined by electric field distribution and cumulative electroporation exposure, while excessive energy delivery may induce unwanted thermal or electrochemical effects. Procedural efficacy also depends on stable catheter positioning, adequate tissue proximity, and sufficient lesion overlap. Unlike thermal ablation technologies, conventional procedural markers such as electrogram attenuation, impedance changes, and pacing threshold variation correlate poorly with durable irreversible electroporation. Multiparametric lesion estimation models integrating electrical, mechanical, and positional data have shown encouraging preclinical results, although clinical validation remains limited. Emerging strategies combining electroanatomical mapping, imaging, and automated electrogram analysis may improve real-time evaluation of lesion continuity and durability. Current PFA workflows rely mainly on standardized energy delivery protocols, optimized catheter positioning, and lesion overlap rather than real-time titration of energy. Although robust intraprocedural markers of irreversible electroporation are still lacking, ongoing advances in catheter technology, imaging, and lesion assessment tools are expected to improve procedural reproducibility and long-term lesion durability. Further studies are needed to establish validated endpoints for durable PFA lesion formation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fernández et al. (2026) conducted a review in Cardiac arrhythmias (including atrial fibrillation). Pulsed field ablation (PFA) vs. Thermal ablation (e.g., radiofrequency ablation) was evaluated. Pulsed field ablation lesion durability relies on standardized energy delivery, catheter positioning, and lesion overlap rather than conventional thermal markers like electrogram attenuation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: