What are the considerations for patients undergoing an Electrophysiology Study (EPS) with Radiofrequency (RF) ablation?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: October 2, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Considerations for Patients Undergoing Electrophysiology Study (EPS) with Radiofrequency (RF) Ablation

Radiofrequency catheter ablation is the treatment of choice for most patients with symptomatic arrhythmias that are drug-resistant, when patients cannot tolerate antiarrhythmic medications, or when patients prefer ablation over long-term drug therapy. 1

Indications for RF Ablation

Class I Indications (Strong Recommendations)

  • Symptomatic sustained AVNRT that is drug resistant, drug intolerant, or patient preference 2
  • Symptomatic AV reentrant tachycardia that is drug resistant, drug intolerant, or patient preference 2
  • Atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response via accessory pathway that is drug resistant 2
  • Atrial tachycardia or flutter that is drug resistant 2
  • Sustained monomorphic VT that is drug resistant 2
  • Bundle branch reentrant ventricular tachycardia 2

Class II Indications (Reasonable to Consider)

  • Sustained AVNRT identified during EP study for another arrhythmia 2
  • AV reentrant tachycardia identified during EP study for another arrhythmia 2
  • Asymptomatic ventricular pre-excitation affecting livelihood, profession, or public safety 2
  • Atrial flutter/tachycardia associated with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation 2

Success Rates and Outcomes

Success rates vary by arrhythmia type and location:

  • Accessory pathways: 91% for left free-wall, 87% for septal, and 82% for right free-wall 2
  • Overall success rates exceed 95% for most common SVTs 1
  • Long-term success in RVOT tachycardia: 95% 3
  • Success rates for ARVD patients are lower at 71% 3

Complications to Consider

General Complications (2-3% overall rate) 2, 1

  • Death (0.1-0.2%) 2, 1
  • Vascular access complications (1%): hematomas, fistulas 2
  • Pneumothorax (0.2%) 2
  • Cardiac tamponade 2
  • Pulmonary or systemic emboli 2

Arrhythmia-Specific Complications

  • AV block: 0.1-1.3% (higher with fast pathway ablation at 5.3% vs. slow pathway at 2%) 1
  • Bundle branch block: 0.9% for right bundle, 0.3% for left bundle with anteroseptal pathways 2
  • Valve damage 2

Risk Factors for Complications

  • Older age (significantly higher complication rates in elderly patients: 6.1% vs 2.0% in younger patients) 4
  • Presence of systemic disease in elderly patients 4
  • Anatomical location of arrhythmia focus (septal pathways carry higher risk of AV block) 2

Pre-Procedure Considerations

Contraindications

  • Unstable angina 2
  • Bacteremia or septicemia 2
  • Acute decompensated heart failure not caused by the arrhythmia 2
  • Major bleeding diathesis 2
  • Acute lower extremity venous thrombosis (if femoral approach planned) 2
  • Inability to receive anticoagulation for AF ablation 1

Patient Selection Factors

  • Arrhythmia mechanism (reentrant vs. automatic/triggered) 3
  • Structural heart disease (affects success rates and complication risk) 5, 3
  • Prior response to antiarrhythmic medications 2
  • Patient preference regarding long-term medication vs. ablation 2

Post-Procedure Care

  • Anticoagulation for at least 2 months post-ablation for AF 1
  • Regular monitoring with ECGs and Holter monitoring 1
  • Continued antiarrhythmic therapy may be needed in some patients 5
  • Careful follow-up for recurrence (recurrence rates vary: 6% for RVOT, 48% for ARVD) 3

Special Considerations

  • For patients with ICDs experiencing inappropriate shocks due to SVT, RF ablation is highly effective (95% reduction in inappropriate therapies) 6
  • In patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and AF, ablation can be effective (64% success rate) with marked symptomatic improvement 5
  • Patients with ARVD have lower success rates and higher recurrence rates than those with RVOT tachycardia 3

Pitfalls to Avoid

  • Failing to distinguish between ARVD and RVOT tachycardia (different success rates and approaches) 3
  • Underestimating complication risks in elderly patients 4
  • Performing AF ablation solely to avoid anticoagulation (Class III harm) 1
  • Discontinuing anticoagulation based solely on perceived success of AF ablation 1
  • Overlooking the possibility of multiple accessory pathways (present in 6% of WPW patients) 7

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.