Key result
Superior access for AVN ablation after LBBAP cuts procedure time by ~19 minutes vs femoral.
Why the study?
Atrioventricular node ablation after left bundle branch area pacing is recommended for rate control in permanent atrial fibrillation, but the exact timing and optimal venous approach are not well standardized.
Does a superior axillary venous approach via the pacemaker pocket improve procedural parameters compared to a standard inferior femoral vein approach for atrioventricular node ablation after left bundle branch area pacing in patients with symptomatic permanent atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=92)
No
Does a superior axillary venous approach via the pacemaker pocket improve procedural parameters compared to a standard inferior femoral vein approach for atrioventricular node ablation after left bundle branch area pacing in patients with symptomatic permanent atrial fibrillation?
Performing atrioventricular node ablation via the axillary pacemaker pocket during a single-setting LBBAP pace-and-ablate procedure significantly reduces total procedural time by nearly 20 minutes with similar safety and efficacy compared to the standard femoral vein approach.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Superior pocket access may shorten procedures after LBBAP; extends single-procedure pace-and-ablate data but leaves open routine adoption.
BACKGROUND: Atrioventricular node (AVN) ablation after left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is currently recommended as an effective rate-control strategy in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation, but the exact timing and the optimal venous approach are less standardized. OBJECTIVE: The current study aimed to compare the feasibility of the superior approach with the standard femoral vein approach for AVN ablation after LBBAP in a single pace-and-ablate procedure. METHODS: We compared 46 patients with a superior approach and 46 with an inferior approach for AVN ablation after LBBAP based on procedural parameters such as procedural time, fluoroscopy time, ablation time, number of applications, mean power, and temperature. RESULTS: LBBAP significantly reduced the QRS duration in both groups. Except for a higher R-wave detection in the inferior approach group, all other pacing-related parameters showed no statistically significant differences. The AVN ablation procedure was successful in all patients during the index procedure and from the right atrial side. The total procedural time was significantly shorter with the superior approach. The ablation time, number of applications, mean power, and total fluoroscopy time were similar between the two groups. No periprocedural complications were recorded. The pacing threshold improved in both groups at the 6-months follow-up. One patient in the superior approach group demonstrated recovery of AVN conduction, requiring an additional ablation procedure. CONCLUSION: As part of a single pace-and-ablate procedure, AVN ablation via the pacemaker pocket had shorter total procedural time and non-significantly different procedural characteristics and outcomes than the standard femoral vein approach.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pestrea et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Symptomatic permanent atrial fibrillation undergoing left bundle branch area pacing and atrioventricular node ablation (n=92). Superior approach (axillary access via pacemaker pocket) for AVN ablation after LBBAP vs. Inferior approach (standard right femoral vein access) for AVN ablation after LBBAP was evaluated on Total procedural time (minutes) (MD -19.3 minutes, p=<0.001). Superior venous access via the pacemaker pocket for AVN ablation after LBBAP reduced total procedural time compared to the femoral approach (83.4 ± 18.6 vs 102.7 ± 12.1 minutes, p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: