Introduction: We compared, in a prospective and randomized fashion with a cross-over design, the anterior and posterior approaches to radiofrequency (RF) modification of the AV node in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation.
Methods and results: Thirty-three patients were randomized to receive first an anterior (group I) or posterior (group II) approach for RF modification of AV nodal conduction. Patients who did not fill the endpoint ventricular rate (< 90 beats/min) were crossed over to the alternative approach. After the anterior approach in group I patients, mean ventricular rate was significantly lower than in group II patients after the posterior approach (79.6 +/- 18.8 beats/min vs 110.8 +/- 16.2 beats/min, P < 0.001). In group I, 14 (82%) of 17 patients fulfilled the endpoint, 1 (6%) had complete AV block, and 2 (12%) were crossed over to the posterior approach fulfilling the endpoint. In group II, 4 (25%) of 16 patients fulfilled the endpoint. No transient or permanent high-degree AV block was observed. Among the 12 patients who were crossed over to the anterior approach, 8 fulfilled the endpoint, whereas 4 had permanent high-degree AV block. RF ablation carried out only in the anterior region was safer than a stepwise approach (6% vs 33% incidence of AV block), even though the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.09).
Conclusion: Posterior AV nodal modification is less effective but safer than anterior AV nodal modification. However, to reduce the incidence of AV block, the anterior approach is preferable to a stepwise approach from the posterior to the anterior zone.