Key result
Direct current and radiofrequency ablation achieved initial complete AV block in 87% and 90% of patients, respectively, with serious complications in 7% of DC patients and 0% of RF patients.
Why the study?
Does radiofrequency catheter ablation improve safety and efficacy compared to direct current ablation in patients with drug resistant supraventricular tachyarrhythmias?
Population
147 patients with drug resistant supraventricular tachyarrhythmias
Comparison
Radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation vs Direct current (DC) catheter ablation
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
Mean 45 +/- 24 months for DC ablation, 11 +/- 3 months for…
Authors
Loading...
RF ablation may achieve similar AV block rates with fewer complications than DC; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Cohort (n=147)
Does radiofrequency catheter ablation improve safety and efficacy compared to direct current ablation in patients with drug resistant supraventricular tachyarrhythmias?
Absolute Event Rate: 87% vs 90%
Radiofrequency ablation is an effective treatment for drug-resistant supraventricular arrhythmias and appears to have a lower risk of serious complications compared to direct current ablation.
Trappe et al. (1993) conducted a cohort in drug resistant supraventricular tachyarrhythmias (n=147). Direct current (DC) ablation vs. Radiofrequency (RF) ablation was evaluated on complete atrioventricular (AV) block achieved initially. Direct current and radiofrequency ablation achieved initial complete AV block in 87% and 90% of patients, respectively, with serious complications in 7% of DC patients and 0% of RF patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: