(Circulation. 1996;93:969-972.)
© 1996 American Heart Association, Inc.
Articles |
From the Department of Medicine, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
Correspondence to Dr George J. Klein, University Hospital, 339 Windermere Rd, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5A5.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods and Results Fifteen patients with AV node reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) and discontinuous AV node function curves were compared with 15 patients with AVNRT and smooth AV node function curves. In the group with a discontinuous curve, the "net" anterograde effective refractory period (AERP) of the AV node increased (270±28 versus 304±37 ms, P=.03) and AERP of the remaining fast pathway decreased (367±100 versus 304±37 ms, P=.026) after the ablation. In the group with a smooth curve, the AERP of the AV node increased (266±42 versus 299±76 ms, P=.07) and the anterograde Wenckebach cycle length increased (336±66 versus 379±86 ms, P=.008) after the ablation. Retrograde conduction over the AV node was similar in both groups and was unchanged after ablation. The longest attainable AH interval (AHmax) measured during atrial extrastimulus testing was more prolonged in patients with a discontinuous curve than in patients with a smooth curve (326±48 versus 250±70 ms, P=.002). The AHmax shortened in both groups after ablation (326±48 versus 173±34 ms, P<.0001, and 250±70 versus 179±34 ms, P<.0003, respectively) and were similar. Successful ablation in the slow-pathway zone in patients with a smooth AV node function curve resulted in the loss of the "tail" of the curve representing the slow pathway.
Conclusions These data suggest that the smooth AV node function curve consists of two distinct components representing both fast and slow AV node pathways even when the typical discontinuity is absent.
Key Words: atrioventricular node catheter ablation reentry arrhythmia electrophysiology
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Electrophysiological Study
Written and verbal consents were
obtained from all patients.
Each patient was studied in the fasting state under sedation with
intravenous midazolam and fentanyl or general
anesthesia with propofol. All antiarrhythmic medication was
discontinued a minimum of five half-lives before the study. Three
quadripolar catheters were introduced percutaneously
into the right femoral vein and advanced to the high right atrium, His
bundle recording position, and right ventricular
apex, respectively. An octapolar catheter was placed in the
coronary sinus via the left subclavian vein. A baseline study
was performed in all patients to confirm the diagnosis of
AVNRT5 and to measure anterograde and retrograde
conduction parameters. Briefly, the study consisted of high
right atrial and right ventricular apical incremental
pacing to block and extrastimulus testing with at least two drive cycle
lengths. Presence of dual AV node physiology was established by a
sudden prolongation of the AH interval of at least 50 ms for a 10-ms
decrement during extrastimulus testing. There was no systematic attempt
to use multiple atrial sites or further cycle lengths when
discontinuous curves were not observed.
Radiofrequency Ablation
A 7F quadripolar deflectable catheter
(Mansfield-Webster) with a
4-mm tip electrode was used for ablation. Radiofrequency energy was
delivered by a device that operates at 350 kHz and provides continuous
monitoring of current, impedance, and energy (RFG-3D, Radionics). The
approach used in our laboratory has been described
previously.6 A power setting of 30 W was used for each
ablation attempt. Current was applied for 40 seconds if junctional
tachycardia was observed during ablation. Application of
energy was interrupted if junctional tachycardia did not
occur within 10 seconds or if impedance rose. Lesions were anatomically
guided and directed to the region between the orifice of the
coronary sinus and tricuspid annulus. The end point in patients
with dual pathways was elimination of the slow pathway as evaluated by
atrial extrastimulus testing. In the absence of dual AV node
physiology, noninducibility of reentrant tachycardia and
elimination of all echo beats served as markers of successful
ablation.
Evaluation After Ablation
Thirty to 45 minutes after the last
radiofrequency ablation, the
presence of slow-pathway conduction was assessed by programmed
atrial stimulation. If anterograde slow-pathway conduction
was eliminated, electrophysiological
evaluation was repeated according to the same protocol as previously
described. All patients were monitored continuously for 24 hours after
the procedure. Patients were discharged without antiarrhythmic
medication and were reevaluated at 3 months. Follow-up
electrophysiological testing was not
performed unless the patient developed evidence of
tachycardia.
Additional Measurements and Definitions
The ERP of the AV
node was defined as the longest
A1A2 interval measured at the His bundle site
that failed to generate a nodal response to a premature atrial
extrastimulus (A2). The "net" ERP refers to the
shortest ERP regardless of discontinuity and is the slow-pathway
ERP in patients with dual pathways. Whenever possible, all ERP
measurements were determined with a drive cycle length of 600 ms. For
each individual patient, the drive cycle lengths at which ERP
measurements were obtained before the ablation were matched and
repeated after the ablation. The AV node function curve was defined as
the plot of AH interval as a function of prematurity of the atrial
extrastimulus as measured at the His bundle site. The maximum
AHmax was the longest AH interval
(A2H2) measured during atrial extrastimulus
testing and was determined both before and after ablation.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analysis of
electrophysiological data before and after
ablation was performed by use of the two-tailed paired Student's
t test. Student's t test for independent samples
with Bonferroni's correction was used when appropriate. ANOVA was used
to compare continuous variables in multiple groups. Data were
expressed as mean±SD. A value of P<.05 was considered
statistically significant.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Effects of Slow-Pathway Ablation Group 1
Sustained slow-fast
AVNRT was induced in 12 of 15 patients
before ablation. Sustained atypical AVNRT was induced in 1 patient, and
typical AV node echo beats were observed in 2. Clear evidence of dual
AV node physiology was present in all patients before ablation (Fig
1
). The effects of ablation on the refractory and
conduction properties of the AV node are shown in the
Table
. Sinus cycle length (779±182 versus 732±146
ms,
P=NS), AH interval (65±15 versus 58±13 ms,
P=NS), and anterograde Wenckebach cycle length
(362±67 versus 368±60 ms, P=NS) remained
unchanged. The
net AERP of the AV node increased (270±28 versus 304±37 ms,
P=.03), whereas the ERP of the remaining fast pathway
shortened (367±100 versus 304±37 ms, P=.026).
|
|
Before ablation, all patients in group 1 had retrograde ventriculoatrial conduction. After ablation, 1 patient had no retrograde conduction over the AV node. Retrograde Wenckebach cycle length (335±60 versus 323±44 ms, P=NS) and the retrograde ERP of the AV node (282±49 versus 270±34 ms, P=NS) remained unchanged.
Effects of Ablation at the Putative Slow-Pathway Site in
Group 2
Sustained slow-fast AVNRT was induced in 10 of 15 patients
before ablation. Sustained atypical AVNRT was observed in 4 patients,
while typical AV node echo beats were seen in 1. Clear evidence of dual
AV node pathways as evidenced by discontinuity of the AV node function
curve was not present before ablation (Fig 2
). In
one case of a patient with recurrent atrial fibrillation, the entire
electrophysiological study and ablation
were performed while the patient was on a procainamide
infusion. In three cases, propranolol and atropine were
infused. The latter did not alter individual AV node function curves.
The effects of ablation on the refractory and conduction properties of
the AV node are shown in the Table
. Sinus cycle length
(685±101 versus
696±108 ms, P=NS) and the AH interval (65±23
versus 70±17
ms, P=NS) remained unchanged. The anterograde
Wenckebach cycle length increased (336±66 versus 379±86 ms,
P=.008), and the AERP of the AV node increased (266±42
versus 299±76 ms, P=.07).
|
Retrograde Wenckebach cycle length increased slightly after ablation (328±55 versus 359±75 ms, P=NS). The retrograde ERP of the AV node (267±38 versus 252±90 ms, P=NS) remained unchanged.
Comparison of Groups 1 and 2
The sinus cycle length did not
differ between the two groups
either before or after ablation. The net ERP before (dual, 270±27.8
versus 266±42 ms, P=NS) and after (dual, 304±37
versus
299±76 ms, P=NS) ablation remained unchanged. The
anterograde Wenckebach cycle length remained unchanged in group
1 (discontinuous AV node function curve) but increased after the
ablation in group 2 (smooth AV node function curve) (362±67 versus
368±60 ms, P=NS, and 336±66 versus 379±86
ms,
P=.008, respectively).
Retrograde Wenckebach cycle length and retrograde ERP of the AV node were similar and did not change after ablation.
The baseline AHmax was significantly different between groups (ANOVA, P<.001). The AHmax measured during atrial extrastimulus testing before ablation was greater in patients with discontinuous AV node function curves than in patients with a smooth AV node function curve (326±48 versus 250±70 ms, P=.002), and both values were greater than the control group (control, 205±37 ms, P<.05). After ablation in patients with a discontinuous AV node function curve, the AHmax was shortened (326±48 versus 173±34 ms, P<.0001). The AHmax in patients with smooth AV node function curves also shortened significantly after ablation (250±70 versus 179±56 ms, P<.0003). After ablation, the AHmax was similar in both groups (dual, 173±34 versus no dual, 179±56 ms, P=NS). The AHmax measured in the control group was similar to both the treated groups after ablation (control, 205±37 versus dual, 173±34 versus no dual, 179±56 ms; ANOVA, P=.076).
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This study further supports the hypothesis that the smooth AV node refractory curve in fact consists of two distinct components representing both fast and slow AV node pathways even when the typical discontinuity is absent. Successful ablation in the slow-pathway zone in these patients resulted in loss of the "tail" of the curve representing the slow pathway. The AHmax obtained with atrial extrastimuli decreased in a parallel fashion after ablation in patients both with and without dual-pathway curves. The initial longest attainable AHmax was shorter in patients without typical dual-pathway curves, suggesting that the slow pathway in patients without typical discontinuities may be "less decremental." The remaining fast pathway had a similar ERP in patients with both discontinuous and smooth curves, which was also similar to the ERP of the AV node in control subjects, who presumably do not have a slow pathway. As has been described previously, the ERP of the fast pathway in patients with discontinuous curves initially shortened after ablation of the slow pathway.7 8 The data suggest that patients with smooth AV node function curves differ from those with discontinuous AV node function curves only in magnitude of the difference in conduction time over the two slow pathways. There is no reason to believe that the arrhythmia substrates are different. This is further supported by curve-fitting data suggesting that the slow-pathway component can be distinguished from the fast-pathway component of this curve regardless of the presence of discontinuities.9
Limitations
This study has important limitations. First, an
exhaustive attempt
to demonstrate discontinuities in the curve was not made because of
reluctance to inadvertently produce atrial
fibrillation. It is possible that use of multiple atrial sites, more
extrastimuli, or pharmacological maneuvers could have revealed
discontinuities in some of the smooth curves. Second, the
slow-pathway component of the curves may have a relatively short
duration in some individuals. This would make this judgment of "loss
of the tail" more tenuous and difficult in these patients.
Clinical Implications
Loss of the slow pathway is a useful
predictor of clinical
efficacy in patients undergoing slow-pathway ablation for AV node
reentry and is preferred by some investigators.10 11
This
end point is less evident when the initial curves do not yield a
discontinuity. This study suggests that loss of the "tail" of the
curve, as indicated by prolongation of the ERP and failure to attain
the AHmax previously observed, can be considered
essentially comparable to loss of the slow-pathway portion of the
curve in patients with obvious discontinuity.
Persistence of a slow pathway with single echo cycles in some patients suggests the continued presence of the arrhythmia substrate and potential for further clinical occurrence of AV node reentrance.11 Significant shortening of the AHmax in this setting suggests that the slow pathway may have been altered or, alternatively, the slow pathway remaining is not the "clinical" slow pathway that caused the initial tachycardia. This might, in part, explain the clinical observation that persistence of a slow pathway by no means precludes an excellent clinical result.12 13 14 15
Finally, the study suggests that an AHmax in the range of 250 to 300 ms or greater may indicate the presence of a slow pathway whether or not the curve is discontinuous. This merits further observations with larger numbers of patients.
| Selected Abbreviations and Acronyms |
|---|
|
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
Received July 11, 1995; revision received October 4, 1995; accepted October 6, 1995.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
D. G Katritsis and A. J. Camm Classification and differential diagnosis of atrioventricular nodal re-entrant tachycardia. Europace, January 1, 2006; 8(1): 29 - 36. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. M. Heinroth, K. Kattenbeck, I. Stabenow, H.-J. Trappe, and P. Weismuller Multiple AV nodal pathways in patients with AV nodal reentrant tachycardia -- more common than expected? Europace, January 1, 2002; 4(4): 375 - 382. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. D'Este, E. Bertaglia, A. Zanocco, B. Reimers, and P. Pascotto Electrophysiological properties of the atrioventricular node and ageing: evidence of a lower incidence of dual nodal pathways in the elderly Europace, January 1, 2001; 3(3): 216 - 220. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C.-T. Kuo, K.-H. Lin, N.-J. Cheng, P.-H. Chu, T.-S. Hsu, C.-W. Chiang, and Y.-S. Lee Characterization of Atrioventricular Nodal Reentry With Continuous Atrioventricular Node Conduction Curve by Double Atrial Extrastimulation Circulation, February 9, 1999; 99(5): 659 - 665. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Medkour, A. E. Becker, K. Khalife, and J. Billette Anatomic and Functional Characteristics of a Slow Posterior AV Nodal Pathway : Role in Dual-Pathway Physiology and Reentry Circulation, July 14, 1998; 98(2): 164 - 174. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. Belhassen, R. Fish, M. Glikson, A. Glick, M. Eldar, S. Laniado, and S. Viskin Noninvasive Diagnosis of Dual AV Node Physiology in Patients With AV Nodal Reentrant Tachycardia by Administration of Adenosine-5'-Triphosphate During Sinus Rhythm Circulation, July 7, 1998; 98(1): 47 - 53. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. D. Krahn, G. J. Klein, R. Yee, M. N. Basta, and J. K. Lee Progressive Anterior Ablation in the Coronary Sinus Region : Evidence to Support the Presence of a `Slow Pathway' Input in Normal Patients? Circulation, November 18, 1997; 96(10): 3477 - 3483. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
C.-T. Tai, S.-A. Chen, C.-E. Chiang, S.-H. Lee, Z.-C. Wen, C.-W. Chiou, K.-C. Ueng, Y.-J. Chen, W.-C. Yu, J.-L. Huang, et al. Complex Electrophysiological Characteristics in Atrioventricular Nodal Reentrant Tachycardia With Continuous Atrioventricular Node Function Curves Circulation, June 3, 1997; 95(11): 2541 - 2547. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1996 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |