Pulsed-field versus cryoballoon ablation for atrial fibrillation-Impact of energy source on sedation and analgesia requirement

Introduction: Pulsed field ablation (PFA) represents a novel, nonthermal energy modality that can be applied for single-shot pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in atrial fibrillation (AF). Comparative data with regard to deep sedation to established single-shot modalities such as cryoballoon (CB) ablation are scarce. The aim of this study was to compare a deep sedation protocol in patients receiving PVI with either PFA or CB.Methods: Prospective, consecutive AF patients undergoing PVI with a pentaspline PFA catheter were compared to a retrospective CB-PVI cohort of the same timeframe. Study endpoints were the requirements of analgesics, cardiorespiratory stability, and sedation-associated complications.Results: A total of 100 PVI patients were included (PFA n = 50, CB n = 50, mean age 66 +/- 10.6, 61% male patients, 65% paroxysmal AF). Requirement of propofol, midazolam, and sufentanyl was significantly higher in the PFA group compared to CB [propofol 0.14 +/- 0.04 mg/kg/min in PFA vs. 0.11 +/- 0.04 mg/kg/min in CB (p = .001); midazolam 0.00086 +/- 0.0004 mg/kg/min in PFA vs. 0.0006295 +/- 0.0003 mg/kg/min in CB (p = .002) and sufentanyl 0.0013 +/- 0.0007 mu g/kg/min in PFA vs. 0.0008 +/- 0.0004 mu g/kg/min in CB (p < .0001)]. Sedation-associated complications did not differ between both groups (PFA n = 1/50 mild aspiration pneumonia, CB n = 0/50, p > .99). Nonsedation-associated complications (PFA: n = 2/50, 4%, CB: n = 1/50, 2%, p > .99) and procedure times (PFA 75 +/- 31, CB 84 +/- 32 min, p = .18) did not differ between groups.Conclusions: PFA is associated with higher sedation and especially analgesia requirements. However, the safety of deep sedation does not differ to CB ablation.