Comparing High-Frequency With Monophasic Electroporation Protocols in an In Vivo Beating Heart Model

Eyal Heller, Tomas Garcia-Sanchez, Yonatan Moshkovits, Raul Rabinovici, Dvora Grynberg, Amit Segev, Samuel J. Asirvatham, Antoni Ivorra, Elad Maor

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

Abstract

This study compared monophasic 100-μs pulses with high-frequency electroporation (HF-EP) bursts using an in vivo animal model. Myocardial damage was evaluated by histologic analysis. Compared with 10 monophasic pulses, 20 bursts of HF-EP at 100 and 150 kHz were associated with less damage. However, when the number of HF-EP bursts was increased to 60, myocardial damage was comparable to that of the monophasic group. HF-EP protocols were associated with attenuated collateral muscle contractions. This study shows that HF-EP is feasible and effective and that pulse frequency has a significant effect on extent of ablation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)959-964
Number of pages6
JournalJACC: Clinical Electrophysiology
Volume7
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2021

Keywords

  • electroporation
  • H-FIRE
  • muscle contraction
  • pulsed field ablation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Physiology (medical)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing High-Frequency With Monophasic Electroporation Protocols in an In Vivo Beating Heart Model'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this