Skip to main content
FARAPULSE device image over blue pulse background.

   

SINGLE SHOT CHAMPION Trial

FARAPULSE PFA vs. Arctic Front Advance™ Cryoballoon (N=210)1

At 2 Swiss centers, operators conducted a 1:1 randomization to FARAPULSE Pulsed Field Ablation or Arctic Front Advance™ CBA; all patients received insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs).

STUDY DESIGN
Investigator-initiated, patient-blinded, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial

PATIENT POPULATION
Drug–refractory paroxysmal AFib

REPORTED OUTCOMES
Efficacy

FARAPULSE PFA delivered clinical strength.

FARAPULSE Pulsed Field Ablation icon.

Superior Efficacy

RECURRENCE-FREE EFFICACY

Bar chart comparing recurrence-free efficacy between FARAPULSE and Arctic Front Advance. FARAPULSE shows 62.9% of patients with recurrence-free outcomes, while Arctic Front Advance shows 49.3%. FARAPULSE demonstrates higher recurrence-free efficacy.

FARAPULSE PFA-treated patients demonstrated superior recurrence-free rates at 1 year vs. Arctic Front Advance (p=0.046) 

Key Takeaway

  • FARAPULSE PFA resulted in significantly less AA recurrence
View full publication


 

Next: See the real-world safety data.

MANIFEST-17K Multicenter Registry
FARAPULSE™ Pulsed Field Ablation System indications, safety, and warnings

Reference:
1. Reichlin T, Kueffer T, Badertscher P, et al. Pulsed field or cryoballoon ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2025;392(15):1497-1507. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2502280