Background Atrial fibrillation is increasingly prevalent and constitutes a severe economic and clinical burden. Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is an effective treatment. Evidence on the safety of same-day discharge (SDD) after PVI, instead of overnight stay (ONS), is limited. Methods & results This retrospective study uses data from PVI's performed between June 2018 and December 2020 in the Netherlands. Baseline characteristics, clinical outcome data and health care utilization, extracted from two national databases, were compared between the implementation of an SDD protocol in a single centre and a national benchmark where majority is an ONS strategy. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were performed. We included data from 11,812 PVI's; 1,360 in the SDD group and 10,452 for the ONS benchmark. The SDD protocol group performed 57.7% of PVI's in SDD, the benchmark 5.3% (p<.001). The SDD protocol group performed more cryoballoon PVI (90.8% vs. 39.2%, p<.001). There were no differences in bleeding (p=.830), thromboembolic (p=.893) or vascular complications (p=.720), or cardiac tamponade (p=.634). Peri-procedural hospital stay was significantly shorter in the SDD protocol group (0.50 day vs. 1.52 days, p<.001), without a reallocation of healthcare to outpatient clinic (p=.230), emergency department (p=.132) or higher rate of readmission (p=.092). Conclusion The SDD protocol group with 57.7% SDD has similar complication rates and lower health care utilization, compared to the national ONS benchmark with 5.3% SDD, indicating that SDD is a safe and effective alternative for ONS in patients undergoing PVI. The 5.3% ONS in the benchmark suggests a potential reduction of nationwide healthcare utilization.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

This study did not receive any funding.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

The data underlying this article were provided by the Netherlands Heart Registration (NHR) and Dutch Hospital Data (DHD) by permission. A request can be submitted to NHR and DHD to access these data.