Long-Term Outcomes of Radiofrequency Atrioventricular Node Ablation in a Real-World Population.

Figures

• 

  FIGURE 1. Incidence and composition of the composite safety endpoint during follow‐up. (A) Cumulative incidence of the composite safety endpoint during follow‐up after atrioventricular node ablation (AVNA). (B) distribution of individual components contributing to the composite endpoint, including heart failure (HF) rehospitalization, device infection, lead revision, and upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). HF rehospitalization represents the predominant clinical component of the composite endpoint. [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

• 

  FIGURE 2. Changes in left ventricular ejection fraction following atrioventricular node ablation. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LV‐EF) at baseline and at last follow‐up after AV node ablation (AVNA). Individual patient trajectories are shown, together with mean and median changes in LV‐EF over time. Patients undergoing CRT upgrade are included in the analysis according to their last available echocardiographic assessment. [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

• 

  FIGURE 3. Patient‐reported outcomes and quality‐of‐life measures following atrioventricular node ablation. (A) change in EHRA symptom class before and after AVNA. (B) change in NYHA functional class following AV node ablation (AVNA). (C) patient‐reported overall satisfaction with AVNA. (D) willingness to undergo AVNA again for arrhythmia management. Collectively, these measures reflect patient‐centered improvements in quality of life (QOL), functional status, and treatment satisfaction. [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

• 

  FIGURE 4. Survival analyses stratified by baseline device type and left ventricular function. (A) Kaplan–Meier curves illustrating freedom from the composite safety endpoint stratified by device type at the time of AVNA (CRT vs. conventional pacemaker/ICD). (B) Kaplan–Meier curves stratified by baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LV‐EF < 35% vs. ≥ 35%). Patients with reduced LV‐EF and those with pre‐existing CRT systems exhibited a significantly higher incidence of the composite endpoint during follow‐up. [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]