Pulsed field ablation versus conventional thermal ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: 4-year outcomes in the ADVENT-LTO study

Pulsed field ablation (PFA) has proven to be a safe and effective non-thermal ablation modality for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF), but little outcome data beyond 1 year have been reported. Here we present results from the ADVENT-LTO study, which provides extended follow-up of the ADVENT trial, the first randomized trial comparing PFA with conventional thermal ablation. In ADVENT-LTO, 364 patients with paroxysmal AF (183 PFA, 181 thermal; 237 men, 127 women) participated and were followed for 1,332 ± 147 days. For the primary endpoint of 4-year treatment success, PFA demonstrated preserved effectiveness compared to thermal ablation (72.8% PFA, 64.3% thermal; P = 0.12). Moreover, there was a trend favoring PFA as compared to thermal ablation for the prespecified outcome of freedom from hospital-based arrhythmia intervention (85.6% PFA, 78.6% thermal; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38−1.05), including fewer repeat ablations (10.4% PFA, 17.7% thermal; P = 0.04) as well as a trend favoring PFA as compared to thermal ablation for the prespecified outcome of progression to persistent AF (2.6% PFA, 4.6% thermal; HR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.16−1.88). Taken together, these data demonstrate that the favorable outcomes of PFA are maintained over the course of 4 years. Coupled with the safety advantages of PFA over thermal ablation, these long-term data support widespread adoption of PFA for the treatment of AF. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT06526546.