Key result
Slow pathway ablation for atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia in patients with a prolonged PR interval carries a reported higher risk of delayed AV block, with optimal strategy remaining controversial.
Why the study?
What is the optimal ablation strategy and risk of delayed AV block when performing slow pathway ablation in patients with AVNRT and a prolonged PR interval?
What is the optimal ablation strategy and risk of delayed AV block when performing slow pathway ablation in patients with AVNRT and a prolonged PR interval?
This review highlights the controversial optimal ablation strategy and potential higher risk of delayed AV block when performing slow pathway ablation for AVNRT in patients with a prolonged PR interval.
Caution warranted with slow pathway ablation in AVNRT and prolonged PR interval; leaves open optimal strategy and risk mitigation.
Radiofrequency transcatheter ablation is an effective and safe treatment for atrioventricular node reentry tachycardia. Slow pathway ablation is considered the ablative technique of choice, but when atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia is associated with a prolonged PR interval at sinus rhythm, a higher risk of delayed atrioventricular (AV) block has been reported. Studies on the subject are few, enrolling low numbers of patients with variable selection criteria and producing different results. Hence, optimal ablation strategy remains controversial. The aim of this study is to review the available knowledge on the topic. Experience from our centers is also briefly reported.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Crosato et al. (2012) conducted a review in Atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia with a prolonged PR interval. Radiofrequency transcatheter ablation (slow pathway ablation) was evaluated. Slow pathway ablation for atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia in patients with a prolonged PR interval carries a reported higher risk of delayed AV block, with optimal strategy remaining controversial.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: