Key result
AF-Nest ablation completely abolishes cardiac vagal response while conventional ablation yields no denervation.
Why the study?
In cardioneuroablation, identifying the neuromyocardium interface and validating denervation remain major challenges, and the relation of AF-Nest ablation to vagal innervation required evaluation.
Does AF-Nest ablation reduce vagal response to extracardiac vagal stimulation compared to conventional ablation in patients undergoing arrhythmia ablation?
Cohort (n=62)
Does AF-Nest ablation reduce vagal response to extracardiac vagal stimulation compared to conventional ablation in patients undergoing arrhythmia ablation?
AF-Nest ablation provides robust vagal denervation, completely abolishing the cardiac vagal response to extracardiac vagal stimulation, unlike conventional ablation.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
AF-Nest ablation may enable selective vagal denervation; hypothesis-generating for AF outcomes and requires randomized confirmation.
Background: Vagal hyperactivity is directly related to several clinical conditions as reflex/functional bradyarrhythmias and vagal atrial fibrillation (AF). Cardioneuroablation provides therapeutic vagal denervation through endocardial radiofrequency ablation for these cases. The main challenges are neuromyocardium interface identification and the denervation control and validation. The finding that the AF-Nest (AFN) ablation eliminates the atropine response and decreases RR variability suggests that they are related to the vagal innervation. Method: Prospective, controlled, longitudinal, nonrandomized study enrolling 62 patients in 2 groups: AFN group (AFN group 32 patients) with functional or reflex bradyarrhythmias or vagal AF treated with AFN ablation and a control group (30 patients) with anomalous bundles, ventricular premature beats, atrial flutter, atrioventricular nodal reentry, and atrial tachycardia, treated with conventional ablation (non-AFN ablation). In AFN group, ablation delivered at AFN detected by fragmentation/fractionation of the endocardial electrograms and by 3-dimensional anatomic location of the ganglionated plexus. Vagal response was evaluated before, during, and postablation by 5 s noncontact vagal stimulation at the jugular foramen, through the internal jugular veins (extracardiac vagal stimulation [ECVS]), analyzing 15 s mean heart rate, longest RR, pauses, and atrioventricular block. All patients had current guidelines arrhythmia ablation indication. Results: Preablation ECVS induced sinus pauses, asystole, and transient atrioventricular block in both groups showing a strong vagal response ( P =0.96). Postablation ECVS in the AFN group showed complete abolishment of the cardiac vagal response in all cases (pre/postablation ECVS= P <0.0001), demonstrating robust vagal denervation. However, in the control group, vagal response remained practically unchanged postablation ( P =0.35), showing that non-AFN ablation promotes no significant denervation. Conclusions: AFN ablation causes significant vagal denervation. Non-AFN ablation causes no significant vagal denervation. These results suggest that AFNs are intrinsically related to vagal innervation. ECVS was fundamental to stepwise vagal denervation validation during cardioneuroablation. Visual Overview A visual overview is available for this article.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mateos et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Functional or reflex bradyarrhythmias and vagal atrial fibrillation (n=62). AF-Nest (AFN) ablation vs. Conventional ablation (non-AFN ablation) was evaluated on Cardiac vagal response to extracardiac vagal stimulation (p=<0.0001). AF-Nest ablation completely abolished the cardiac vagal response to extracardiac vagal stimulation (P<0.0001), whereas conventional ablation resulted in no significant denervation (P=0.35).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: