Pulsed Field Ablation

This is just uneducated me, but I don't understand why some EPs insist their patients keep taking heart medications after an ablation. To me, they constitute a 'confound'. If the idea at some point is to just help the heart to remain calm in the first three weeks, okay, although to me the dosage should be halved. But to keep it open-ended, and on so many different drugs,....at what point will be want to know if the heart really is blocked from having ectopy or AF?? If it's to be the 12 week Holter, okay, but won't the drugs be suppressing any residual arrhythmia? I would say so. I say this because I find it frustrating when I see questions like yours. Maybe the drugs are what the problem is with feeling well. I don't know a lot about diltiazem, but metoprolol in a heart that HAS calmed, and is in NSR, is likely to put the rate well within the range of bradycardia, which generally causes some patient problems.

To address your question, most people feel a lot better within a few days, say a week, but many also take weeks until they feel better and secure about the success of their procedure. Some find that their heart rate is elevated, sometimes into the 80's and 90's, but still in happy NSR. And for them it might last for ten, twenty weeks. So, we're all different. But, if you are two weeks past an ablation that we all hope was a success, and you're still feeling unwell, especially if your resting HR is usually/often below 50 bpm, then your prescriptions might now be your heart's worst enemies. I think you should let your cardiologist know what's going on, maybe with a view to halving, and soon eliminating, most/all of the heart medications.

Just my opinion.

@gloaming the way it was explained to me was the meds are to protect you during the 8-12 week blanking period when afib can still occur. I agree that this needs to be looked at as the side effects are worse than going into afib

@ltb7 I was on the same meds after my ablation (same doses, I think), but I was on those meds before my ablation and they had controlled my afib for several years, ...until they didn't. My cardiologist kept me on those meds for 3 months, then kept me on them because I was going to Nepal for 2 months and he did not want me to have any problems far from any medical help. When I returned, he took me off the meds.
The period after my ablation was erratic with intermittent afib, fairly frequently for the first month, then it rapidly calmed down. I didn't have any afib after the second month. What my cardiologist told me was, "you are along for the ride."
So, hang in there, hope you start feeling better soon.
I never had any adverse reactions to meds.

@aard thanks for the reply. I’m on day 6 post ablation and I know it’s the meds that are making me feel bad, not the ablation. They said I have to stay on them during the blanking period so I’m really hoping I can last a few more months. I was only on them for weeks before the procedure but my body does not like these meds at all. They are controlling the afib so I guess that’s the plus side.

@ltb7 They may even encourage AF because they put their own demands on the heart that a perfectly decent ablation might have put behind it. All I was left on was metoprolol and a DOAC, and I think the metoprolol might have been a mistake. My heart didn't go six days post ablation before it went berserk and I had to cease metopolol cold and go on amiodarone. I had been on an increasing dose since March, four months previously.

I'm not expert in this stuff, so I defer to those with the learning and experience. But ya gotta wonder sometimes...

@ltb7 That is my understanding as well, but some drugs, like amiodarone, have high residual levels for weeks and even months after ceasing to take them. This suppressive impact on underlying arrhythmia might act as a confound to the Holter assessment that ablatees have after the blanking period has ended. If anti-arrhythmic drugs (AADs) like amiodarone, or Multaq, or Flecainide, or even propafenone, are carrying the water for the heart, and the ablation hasn't been completed properly, what will the Holter tell us? It'll say the heart shows no ectopy or AF, so the ablation must have worked. Not so! The AAD is what is (still) working.

I caution that I am just a patient, although one who has done a lot of reading and who has had two ablations. Each EP has their protocol, and each patient demands a considered and unique approach to treatment. The literature I was given upon release from the cath lab says emphatically to not be dismayed if some minor AF or ectopy happens...it's common, even to be expected. But the research I have read, personally, shows that ectopy in the first five weeks is much better than ectopy that develops later in the blanking period, and of course beyond the Holter and any time in the next 12 months (twelve months free of the treated arrhythmia - a 'successful' ablation). So, the Holter, and the wearing patient, need to know if the ablation has succeeded. This means anything that might alter the heart's performance, especially suppressing arrhythmia, is going to confound the Holter assessment needlessly. To me, it should have been stopped weeks earlier. If prolonged and aggressive ectopy happens during the blanking period, and beyond, the patient can always go back on treatment...just don't expect the Holter to yield a veridical assessment.

My opinion...