Modification of Antegrade Slow Pathway is not Crucial for Successful Catheter Ablation of Common Atrioventricular Nodal Reentrant Tachycardia

• Published in: Pacing and clinical electrophysiology Vol. 22; no. 2; pp. 263 - 267
• Main Authors: GIANFRANCHI, LORELLA, BRIGNOLE, MICHELE, DELISE, PIETRO, MENOZZI, CARLO, PAPARELLA, NELLY, THEMISTOCLAKIS, SAKIS, BONSO, ALDO, LOLLI, GINO, ALBONI, PAOLO
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.02.1999
• Subjects: Atrioventricular Node - physiopathology; AV nodal reentrant tachycardia; Cardiac Pacing, Artificial; Catheter Ablation; electrophysiological study; Electrophysiology; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; slow pathways; Tachycardia, Atrioventricular Nodal Reentry - physiopathology; Tachycardia, Atrioventricular Nodal Reentry - surgery; Time Factors
• ISSN: 0147-8389; 1540-8159
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1999.tb00437.x

We tested the hypothesis that in some patients affected by typical AVNRT, successful catheter ablation treatment may be achieved independently of specific measurable electrophysiological modifications of antegrade AV node conducting properties. Standard electrophysiological parameters and comparable antegrade AV node function curves were obtained, before and after successful ablation, in 104 patients (mean age 52 ± 16 years; 69 women and 35 men) affected by the common form of AVNRT. The end point of the ablation procedure was noninducibility of AVNRT and of no more than one echo beat. For the purpose of this study, AV node duality was defined as an increase of ≥ 50 ms in the A2H2 interval in response to a 10 ms decrease of the A1A2 coupling interval. Before ablation, AV node duality was present in 65 patients (62%) and absent in 39 patients (37%). Ablation caused measurable modifications of electrophysiological properties of the AV node in most patients with elicited AV node duality, but not in most patients without demonstrable AV node duality. After ablation, AV node duality persisted in 20 patients who had it before, whereas a new duality that could not be elicited before appeared in 5 patients. During 19 ± 6 months of follow‐up, clinical AVNRT recurred in 1 of 45 patients who had disappearance of AV node duality after ablation, in 1 of 34 patients who did not show AV node duality before and after ablation, and in 1 of 20 patients who had persistence of AV node duality after ablation. In conclusion, modifications of antegrade conduction properties of the AV node are not crucial for the cure of AVNRT in many patients.