PFA vs. RF

So I hear Pulsed Field Ablation is the latest technology, but what does it mean, exactly? A fluxing magnetic field is causing the scar tissue to form? And how is it different from Radio Frequency ablation?

My clinical notes show I was treated with 2 minutes of Radiofrequency energy lesions, and 199 pulse field ablation lesions.

[scienceinsights.org]

Last I saw, PFA does not offer a significantly improved probability of success (one full year free of the treated arrhythmia) overe RF. It's a bit surprising and defeating, but it's still early days, and we all understand that both applications and techniques, not to mention skills and learning, may improve the performance markedly in the years ahead. So far, though.....nope. And this, if nothing else, should remind us all that it's the EP that matters most in the equation, not so much the method or form of application.

The advantage of PFA is safety and time, not efficacy.

Surprising to hear it is not any more effective. But my question is what is a "pulsed field" exactly?

Pulsed the same way a LASER is pulsed during eye surgery or cosmetic surgery so as not to damage collaterally. Not a steady application, but micro-bursts of electric energy. The field is pulsed, electrical, and causes permanent pores in cells under the applicator, permanently disrupting them.