Comparison of high energy direct current and radiofrequency catheter ablation of the atrioventricular junction.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of the study was to determine short- and long-term success and complications of radiofrequency atrioventricular (AV) junction catheter ablation and to compare these with those of high energy direct current catheter ablation.
BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation of the AV junction with radiofrequency or direct current energy is an accepted treatment for drug-refractory supraventricular tachycardias. Few data are available on the long-term success and effects of radiofrequency ablation or its comparison with direct current ablation.
METHODS: Fifty-four patients who underwent attempted AV junction ablation with radiofrequency energy were followed up for a mean of 24 +/- 8.4 months. These patients were retrospectively compared with 49 patients who underwent attempted AV junction ablation with direct current energy and were followed up for a mean of 41 +/- 23 months.
RESULTS: The early success rate at the time of discharge for radiofrequency ablation was 81.5%, which was not statistically different from that for direct current ablation (85.7%). Fewer sessions were required to achieve complete AV block in the radiofrequency group (1.05 +/- 0.23) (mean +/- SD) compared with the direct current group (1.21 +/- 0.41) (p = 0.02). Although overall complication rates were similar for both groups (9.3% in the radiofrequency group and 8.2% in the direct current group), there was a trend toward more life-threatening early complications in those patients who received direct-current shocks (6.8%) than in those who underwent radiofrequency ablation alone (2.3%) (p = 0.1). Early sudden death (one patient), early ventricular tachycardia (two patients) and cardiac tamponade (one patient) were seen only in those patients who underwent ablation with direct current energy, whereas pulmonary embolism (one patient) was the only early life-threatening complication in the radiofrequency group. During follow-up, the rate of recurrence of AV conduction was the same (5%) for both the direct current and radiofrequency groups. In the direct current group, one patient died suddenly 2 weeks after the procedure and another had a cardiac arrest due to ventricular tachycardia 6 h after the procedure. In the radiofrequency group, two patients died suddenly at 11 and 7 months, respectively. Two patients, one who had unsuccessful radiofrequency ablation and required direct current ablation, were resuscitated from ventricular tachycardia.
CONCLUSIONS: Radiofrequency energy appears to be as efficacious as and perhaps safer than direct current energy for AV junction ablation.