biostudies-literatureUnknown14(9)Dello Russo A<h4>Background</h4>There is no evidence evaluating efficiency, effectiveness, and safety outcomes in older patients in the context of pulsed-field ablation technology for the ablation of atrial fibrillation. We aimed to compare safety, efficacy, and acute and long-term outcomes of pulsed-field ablation in older patients (≥75 years) with younger ones.<h4>Methods</h4>We enrolled consecutive patients who had undergone atrial fibrillation ablation with the pulsed-field ablation FARAPULSE system (Boston Scientific) at 15 centers. Patients were stratified by age (<65, 65-74, and ≥75 years) and efficacy and safety profiles of these groups were compared.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 1082 patients were included: 108 (10%) were ≥75 years old, 374 (34.6%) were 65-74 years old and 600 (55.4%) were <65 yeJournal of the American Heart Associatione037959https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC12184239biostudies-literatureDoes Age Impact Safety and Efficacy During Pulse-Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation?PMC12184239Solimene FValeri YRusso MDe Simone ASchillaci VViola GColella JCompagnucci PRossi PZucchelli GTondo CRossillo ABianchi SCasella MBertini MDi Vilio ADello Russo ARordorf RVolpicelli MMalacrida MIacopino SSchiavone MTundo FZingarini GThemistoclakis SBianchini LMaggio RfalseDoes Age Impact Safety and Efficacy During Pulse-Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation?<h4>Background</h4>There is no evidence evaluating efficiency, effectiveness, and safety outcomes in older patients in the context of pulsed-field ablation technology for the ablation of atrial fibrillation. We aimed to compare safety, efficacy, and acute and long-term outcomes of pulsed-field ablation in older patients (≥75 years) with younger ones.<h4>Methods</h4>We enrolled consecutive patients who had undergone atrial fibrillation ablation with the pulsed-field ablation FARAPULSE system (Boston Scientific) at 15 centers. Patients were stratified by age (<65, 65-74, and ≥75 years) and efficacy and safety profiles of these groups were compared.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 1082 patients were included: 108 (10%) were ≥75 years old, 374 (34.6%) were 65-74 years old and 600 (55.4%) were <65 ye2025-01-01T00:00:00Z2025 May2026-06-03T06:56:21.181Z2026-04-25T03:22:05.668ZS-EPMC121842394026559510.1161/JAHA.124.037959