Medtronic PulseSelect PFA System demonstrates impressive results in landmark PULSED AF global IDE trial
Medtronic (NYSE: MDT) announced that its PulseSelect™ Pulsed Field Ablation (PFA) System achieved significant results in the PULSED AF clinical study. With an adverse event rate of just 0.7%, it surpassed safety performance goals, marking one of the lowest rates in FDA investigational trials for atrial fibrillation (AF). The trial, involving 300 patients across 41 sites in nine countries, demonstrated a clinical success rate exceeding 80% for both paroxysmal and persistent AF. The study's results were presented at the American College of Cardiology session and published in Circulation, highlighting the PulseSelect System as a promising new treatment option for AF.
- Adverse event rate of 0.7%, one of the lowest in FDA investigational trials for AF ablation.
- Clinical success rate exceeding 80% for both patient cohorts.
- Study involved 300 patients across 41 sites in nine countries.
- None.
ACC.23/WCC late-breaking data: PULSED AF, one of the most rigorously executed PFA clinical studies to date, exceeds safety and efficacy performance goals in the treatment of paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation
PULSED AF is the first and only completed, global, and multi-center clinical study with IDE approval to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of PFA technology for AF ablation. PFA is a breakthrough ablation technology that uses pulsed electric fields to efficiently isolate the pulmonary veins for the treatment of patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF.
PULSED AF is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the PulseSelect System for the treatment of AF in adult patients with a history of drug refractory, recurrent and symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent AF. The trial is a prospective, single arm, multi-center clinical trial that treated 300 patients (150 with paroxysmal AF and 150 with persistent AF). Patients were enrolled across 41 sites in nine countries with 67 operators throughout
Study Results: Safety
The study exceeded its performance goal of freedom from a composite of serious procedure and device-related adverse events with a
"Uniquely, these results represent the first prospective, global, large-scale study with two different, rigorously monitored patient populations that demonstrates an impressively low adverse event rate of
Study Results: Efficacy
PULSED AF exceeded the threshold for efficacy performance at
Freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence at 12 months was
"Today's findings demonstrate a critical achievement in the decade-long commitment we have made to researching PFA and underscores our confidence in the PulseSelect System," said
About Patient Monitoring Strategies
Published PFA studies utilize different monitoring frequency and endpoints. For PULSED AF, patients underwent rigorous arrhythmia monitoring with assessments at three, six, and 12 months, and weekly symptomatic trans-telephonic monitoring.
The single-shot PulseSelect System delivers pulsed electric fields through an ablation catheter designed specifically to interrupt irregular electrical pathways in the heart that trigger AF. However, unlike traditional methods of ablation that heat (radiofrequency ablation) or cool (cryoablation) the atrial tissue, the PulseSelect System uses a non-thermal approach and preferentially targets heart tissue with the goal of avoiding unwanted injury to surrounding structures, a risk of current ablation technologies. Worldwide, the PulseSelect System is investigational and not approved for sale or distribution. For more information on PULSED AF, visit Medtronic.com/PFA.
AF is one of the most common and undertreated heart rhythm disorders, affecting more than 60 million people worldwide.1 AF is a progressive disease meaning it can become worse over time and can increase the risk of serious complications including heart failure, stroke and increased risk of death2-5. Antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy has been the current standard first-line treatment, however, AAD therapy is ineffective at controlling AF in approximately half of patients treated with drug therapy.6-8
Any forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties such as those described in Medtronic's periodic reports on file with the
About Medtronic
Bold thinking. Bolder actions. We are Medtronic.
- Roth GA, Mensah GA, Johnson CO et al. Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases and Risk Factors, 1990-2019: Update From the GBD 2019 Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020;76:2982-3021.
- Miyasaka Y, Barnes ME, Bailey KR, et al. Mortality trends in patients diagnosed with first atrial fibrillation: a 21-year community-based study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:986-92.
- Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, et al. 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the
European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS).Eur Heart J 2020. Wolf PA , Abbott RD, Kannel WB. Atrial fibrillation as an independent risk factor for stroke: the Framingham Study. Stroke 1991;22:983-8.Lubitz SA , Moser C, Sullivan L, et al. Atrial fibrillation patterns and risks of subsequent stroke, heart failure, or death in the community.J Am Heart Assoc 2013;2:e000126- Wazni OM, Dandamudi G, Sood N, et al. Cryoballoon Ablation as Initial Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation. N Engl J Med. January 28, 2021;384(4):316-324.
- Kuniss M, Pavlovic N, Velagic V, et al. Cryoballoon ablation vs. antiarrhythmic drugs: first-line therapy for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Europace. March 17, 2021:euab029.
- Andrade JG, Wells GA, Deyell MW, et al. Cryoablation or Drug Therapy for Initial Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation. N Engl J Med. January 28, 2021;384(4):305-315.
- Medtronic data on file
March 2023 . Post-hoc Medtronic analysis efficacy of70.9% and91.3% for the paroxysmal cohort using inspIRE and MANIFEST monitoring protocol and endpoints, respectively, and86.3% in the persistent cohort using the MANIFEST monitoring protocol and endpoints. The analysis is based on publicly available published or presented monitoring methods fromBiosense Webster inspIRE andBoston Scientific FARAPULSE MANIFEST-PF Survey . These outcome rates should not be used to compare the Pulsed AF results to other trial results, as the results have not been adjusted for patient characteristics.
Contacts: | |
Allison Kyriagis | |
Public Relations | Investor Relations |
+1-612-750-6061 | +1-763-505-4626 |
View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/medtronic-pulseselect-pfa-system-demonstrates-impressive-results-in-landmark-pulsed-af-global-ide-trial-301763305.html
SOURCE
FAQ
What were the results of Medtronic's PULSED AF clinical study?
When were the results of the PULSED AF trial announced?
What is the significance of the 0.7% adverse event rate in the PULSED AF study?
How many patients were enrolled in the PULSED AF clinical trial?