HRS: Atrial Arrhythmia Recurrence Lower in Persistent A-Fib With Pulsed Field Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmics

Follow Drugslib on

By Elana Gotkine HealthDay Reporter

Medically reviewed by Carmen Pope, Senior Medical Editor, B. Pharm. Last updated on May 4, 2026.

via HealthDay

MONDAY, May 4, 2026 -- For patients with persistent atrial fibrillation, receipt of pulsed field ablation (PFA) is associated with a significantly lower risk for recurrence of atrial arrhythmia compared with antiarrhythmic-drug therapy receipt, according to a study published online April 25 in the New England Journal of Medicine to coincide with the annual meeting of the Heart Rhythm Society, held from April 23 to 26 in Chicago.

Oussama M. Wazni, M.D., from the Cleveland Clinic, and colleagues conducted an international, randomized trial involving patients with previously untreated persistent atrial fibrillation. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either PFA performed with a pentaspline catheter or antiarrhythmic-drug therapy (207 and 103 patients, respectively). An additional group of patients (PFA-assigned) underwent PFA for analysis of the primary safety end point alone (device- and procedure-related serious adverse events).

The researchers found that 56 and 30 percent of the patients in the PFA and antiarrhythmic-drug groups, respectively, had treatment success at 12 months (hazard ratio for composite treatment failure [a lack of short- and long-term success], 0.46). A primary safety end point occurred in 5.1 percent of the 257 patients in the combined PFA group (both randomized and PFA-assigned groups). Serious adverse events occurred in 25 and 21 percent of patients in the PFA and antiarrhythmic-drug groups, respectively, at 12 months.

"With continuous rhythm monitoring by an insertable device, the trial demonstrated that initial treatment with PFA resulted in a lower burden of detected atrial arrhythmia recurrence over one-year follow-up compared to initial treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs," Wazni said in a statement.

Several authors disclosed ties to biopharmaceutical companies, including Boston Scientific, which funded the study.

Abstract/Full Text (subscription or payment may be required)

More Information

Disclaimer: Statistical data in medical articles provide general trends and do not pertain to individuals. Individual factors can vary greatly. Always seek personalized medical advice for individual healthcare decisions.

Source: HealthDay

Posted : 2026-05-05 02:23

Read more

Disclaimer

Every effort has been made to ensure that the information provided by Drugslib.com is accurate, up-to-date, and complete, but no guarantee is made to that effect. Drug information contained herein may be time sensitive. Drugslib.com information has been compiled for use by healthcare practitioners and consumers in the United States and therefore Drugslib.com does not warrant that uses outside of the United States are appropriate, unless specifically indicated otherwise. Drugslib.com's drug information does not endorse drugs, diagnose patients or recommend therapy. Drugslib.com's drug information is an informational resource designed to assist licensed healthcare practitioners in caring for their patients and/or to serve consumers viewing this service as a supplement to, and not a substitute for, the expertise, skill, knowledge and judgment of healthcare practitioners.

The absence of a warning for a given drug or drug combination in no way should be construed to indicate that the drug or drug combination is safe, effective or appropriate for any given patient. Drugslib.com does not assume any responsibility for any aspect of healthcare administered with the aid of information Drugslib.com provides. The information contained herein is not intended to cover all possible uses, directions, precautions, warnings, drug interactions, allergic reactions, or adverse effects. If you have questions about the drugs you are taking, check with your doctor, nurse or pharmacist.

Popular Keywords