Key result
AVJA increases biventricular pacing by ~9% vs no ablation or rate control.
Why the study?
Atrial fibrillation commonly causes suboptimal CRT delivery because intrinsic atrioventricular conduction reduces effective biventricular capture.
Does atrioventricular junction ablation improve biventricular pacing and clinical outcomes in CRT recipients with atrial fibrillation?
Population
CRT recipients with atrial fibrillation across 16 studies
Comparison
AVJA vs no AVJA or pharmacological rate control
Design
Systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 observational cohorts and 2 randomized trials
Authors
Loading...
Increases biventricular pacing in CRT-AF; extends observational evidence on device delivery but leaves mortality and hospitalization benefits open.
Meta-Analysis (n=16)
Does atrioventricular junction ablation improve biventricular pacing and clinical outcomes in CRT recipients with atrial fibrillation?
Mean Difference: 8.8 (95% CI 5.99–11.61)
AVJA significantly improves biventricular pacing in CRT recipients with atrial fibrillation, but contemporary evidence does not show statistically significant improvements in mortality or heart failure hospitalizations.
Abomohsen et al. (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in Atrial fibrillation in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) recipients (n=16). Atrioventricular junction ablation (AVJA) vs. No AVJA or pharmacological rate control was evaluated on Biventricular pacing (MD 8.80, 95% CI 5.99-11.61). Atrioventricular junction ablation significantly increased biventricular pacing (mean difference 8.80 percentage points; 95% CI 5.99-11.61) compared to no ablation or rate control.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: