Clinical Research in Cardiology

, Volume 104, Issue 11, pp 946–954 | Cite as

Outcome predictors of empirical slow pathway modulation: clinical and procedural characteristics and long-term follow-up

  • Christian Pott
  • Felix K. Wegner
  • Nils Bögeholz
  • Gerrit Frommeyer
  • Dirk G. Dechering
  • Stephan Zellerhoff
  • Simon Kochhäuser
  • Peter Milberg
  • Julia Köbe
  • Kristina Wasmer
  • Günter Breithardt
  • Gerold Mönnig
  • Lars Eckardt
Original Paper
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Objective

Catheter-based modulation of the slow pathway is the first-line therapy of atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT), the most common supraventricular tachycardia (SVT). In patients with a typical history, in whom AVNRT is not inducible during an electrophysiological study, the current guidelines allow consideration of empirical slow pathway modulation (ESPM) under the precondition that both, dual nodal pathway physiology (DNPP) and an ECG documentation compatible with AVNRT exist. This recommendation is based on small series. Furthermore, it is unknown whether ESPM is beneficial in the presence of ECG documentation but the absence of DNPP or vice versa in the presence of DNPP but absence of ECG documentation.

Methods

Out of 3003 patients who underwent slow pathway modulation from 1993 to 2013, we included 116 patients (68 female; median age 47.0 years) with symptomatic tachycardia who had non-inducible SVT. All patients either had ECG documentation of SVT (66 %) or DNPP (89 %) or both (54 %). All patients underwent ESPM. No severe complications occurred.

Results

After a follow-up time of 64 ± 5.3 months, 81 % of all patients had benefited from ESPM (49 % freedom of symptoms, 32 % improvement). In patients with ECG documentation but absence of DNPP 100 % benefited (85 % freedom of symptoms; 15 % improvement). In patients with DNPP but absence of ECG documentation 75 % benefited (40 % freedom of symptoms, 35 % improvement).

Conclusion

In a large cohort of patients, ESPM is a safe procedure that improves clinical symptoms in the majority of patients during long-term follow-up. We show for the first time that this also applies for cases where there is no DNPP but a characteristic ECG documentation, and vice versa.

Keywords

Empirical slow pathway modulation AVNRT Electrophysiology Supraventricular Tachycardia AV node 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work contains data from the doctoral thesis of F. K. W. This study was supported by the German Heart Foundation (Deutsche Stiftung für Herzforschung F/44/12) to C. P. and L. E. and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Sonderforschungsbereich SFB 656 (project C11) to LE. LE holds the Peter-Osypka Professorship for Clinical and Experimental Electrophysiology.

Conflict of interest

None related to this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Denes P, Wu D, Dhingra R, Amat-y-Leon F, Wyndham C, Rosen KM (1975) Dual atrioventricular nodal pathways. A common electrophysiological response. Br Heart J 37(10):1069–1076PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Loh P, Ho SY, Kawara T, Hauer RN, Janse MJ, Breithardt G, de Bakker JM (2003) Reentrant circuits in the canine atrioventricular node during atrial and ventricular echoes: electrophysiological and histological correlation. Circulation 108(2):231–238CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clague JR, Dagres N, Kottkamp H, Breithardt G, Borggrefe M (2001) Targeting the slow pathway for atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia: initial results and long-term follow-up in 379 consecutive patients. Eur Heart J 22(1):82–88CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blomstrom-Lundqvist C, Scheinman MM, Aliot EM, Alpert JS, Calkins H, Camm AJ, Campbell WB, Haines DE et al (2003) ACC/AHA/ESC guidelines for the management of patients with supraventricular arrhythmias–executive summary. a report of the American college of cardiology/American heart association task force on practice guidelines and the European society of cardiology committee for practice guidelines (writing committee to develop guidelines for the management of patients with supraventricular arrhythmias) developed in collaboration with NASPE-Heart Rhythm Society. J Am Coll Cardiol 42(8):1493–1531CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bogun F, Knight B, Weiss R, Bahu M, Goyal R, Harvey M, Daoud E, Man KC et al (1996) Slow pathway ablation in patients with documented but noninducible paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia. J Am Coll Cardiol 28(4):1000–1004CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lin JL, Stephen Huang SK, Lai LP, Ko WC, Tseng YZ, Lien WP (1998) Clinical and electrophysiologic characteristics and long-term efficacy of slow-pathway catheter ablation in patients with spontaneous supraventricular tachycardia and dual atrioventricular node pathways without inducible tachycardia. J Am Coll Cardiol 31(4):855–860CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wang L, Yang H, Han Z, Zhang Y (2004) Long-term efficacy of slow-pathway catheter ablation in patients with documented but noninducible supraventricular tachycardia. Arch Med Res 35(6):507–510CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Laish-Farkash A, Shurrab M, Singh S, Tiong I, Verma A, Amit G, Kiss A, Morriello F et al (2012) Approaches to empiric ablation of slow pathway: results from the Canadian EP web survey. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 35(2):183–187CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Pott
    • 1
  • Felix K. Wegner
    • 1
  • Nils Bögeholz
    • 1
  • Gerrit Frommeyer
    • 1
  • Dirk G. Dechering
    • 1
  • Stephan Zellerhoff
    • 1
  • Simon Kochhäuser
    • 1
  • Peter Milberg
    • 1
  • Julia Köbe
    • 1
  • Kristina Wasmer
    • 1
  • Günter Breithardt
    • 1
  • Gerold Mönnig
    • 1
  • Lars Eckardt
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Electrophysiology, Department of Cardiovascular MedicineUniversity Hospital MünsterMünsterGermany

Personalised recommendations