← Return to Pulse field ablation

Discussion
wews avatar

Pulse field ablation

Heart Rhythm Conditions | Last Active: 3 days ago | Replies (63)

Comment receiving replies
Profile picture for gloaming @gloaming

@cstrutt52 This is what we try to impart to people who visit us over on afibbers.org forum: It's a progressive disorder, and left untreated it becomes highly resistant to any interventions, including amiodarone, which is the 'drug of last resort', or even to ablations. Even pacemakers can't stop all AF because pacemakers are mostly, as far as I know, meant to control rapid ventricular response (RVR) during fibrillation, which can be exceedingly onerous for those muscles over time, and we're not talking weeks...days. Even so, pacing, the operations performed by a pacemaker, invites other problems as a recent paper I read suggests. If it is done poorly, inexpertly set up, or without frequent monitoring to ensure accuracy, it can cause as much of the same kind of damage as unchecked AF and RVR. So, the wisest of us soon understand that an early intervention is the best intervention when it comes to heart arrhythmias, but especially tachyarrhythmias, and most especially when there is clear RVR.

So, you are correct, as far as this non-expert can tell, that PFA is enjoying success at about the same rate as RF does, but in the 'right' hands....for both techniques. And I'm very optimistic that PFA will only get better, even if only marginally, as we do more of it and train other EPs to perform it. Until then, RF and PFA are neck-and-neck for successfully stopping AF (one full year after an ablation is the milestone for 'successful ablation), and PFA enjoys a better reputation for minimizing collateral tissue damage due to the nature of the energy being applied, but also HOW it's applied. That's where the skill, and experience, are key.

Jump to this post


Replies to "@cstrutt52 This is what we try to impart to people who visit us over on afibbers.org..."

@gloaming
I had a PFA this past Sept. As it was explained to me, the PFA is way more effective as it doesn't damage surrounding veins and tissue. I'm 79 and this was my 3rd ablation. The last one was effective for 7 years. I was told what happens over time is that scar tissue builds up and causes problems. The short circuit directly causing afib was corrected and in addition there was a lot of "cleanup" done also. It was a longer procedure than most because of extent of the scar tissue damage.
Prior to the ablation, I had to have 3 electro cardioversions done within 2 months. It's been 3 months and I've had no afib incidents and am 100% off flecainide. I was told if everything went ideally, I could expect another 4 yrs afib free. Shorter than the last one maybe due to my age and ablation history.
I'm grateful for the advancement of medical technology that brought us PFA. Also for the excellent cardiology dept. that I've been seeing for the last few years.