Cargando…

Preventive versus deferred catheter ablation of myocardial infarct–associated ventricular tachycardia: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of catheter ablation for the treatment of ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy remains unclear. Studies examining the impact of early preventive ablation of VT on rates of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapies and morta...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kampaktsis, Polydoros N., Doulamis, Ilias P., Tzani, Aspasia, Cheung, Jim W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8183888/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34113881
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hroo.2020.08.001
_version_ 1783704474654605312
author Kampaktsis, Polydoros N.
Doulamis, Ilias P.
Tzani, Aspasia
Cheung, Jim W.
author_facet Kampaktsis, Polydoros N.
Doulamis, Ilias P.
Tzani, Aspasia
Cheung, Jim W.
author_sort Kampaktsis, Polydoros N.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of catheter ablation for the treatment of ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy remains unclear. Studies examining the impact of early preventive ablation of VT on rates of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapies and mortality have been limited by small sample size. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing initial catheter ablation and ICD implantation (preventive ablation arm) vs ICD implantation alone (deferred ablation arm) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and VT. METHODS: The primary endpoint was the incidence of appropriate ICD therapy during follow-up. Secondary endpoints included appropriate ICD shock, VT storm, procedural complications, and mortality. Sensitivity analysis, meta-regression, and evaluation of bias were performed. RESULTS: Four RCTs (n = 505) fulfilled inclusion criteria. During follow-up (mean >22 months for all RCTs), preventive ablation was associated with a significant reduction in ICD therapies (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.53 [0.36–0.78]). The occurrence of ICD shocks and VT storm were also significantly reduced in the preventive ablation group. Among patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >30%, preventive ablation was associated with marked reduction in ICD therapy when compared to deferred ablation (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.37 [0.19–0.72]). Overall, there was no difference in mortality between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Preventive catheter ablation in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy decreases ICD therapies, ICD shocks, and VT storm without increasing complications, particularly in patients with LVEF >30%. However, early preventive ablation is not associated with any benefit in mortality.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8183888
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81838882021-06-09 Preventive versus deferred catheter ablation of myocardial infarct–associated ventricular tachycardia: A meta-analysis Kampaktsis, Polydoros N. Doulamis, Ilias P. Tzani, Aspasia Cheung, Jim W. Heart Rhythm O2 Clinical BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of catheter ablation for the treatment of ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy remains unclear. Studies examining the impact of early preventive ablation of VT on rates of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapies and mortality have been limited by small sample size. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing initial catheter ablation and ICD implantation (preventive ablation arm) vs ICD implantation alone (deferred ablation arm) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and VT. METHODS: The primary endpoint was the incidence of appropriate ICD therapy during follow-up. Secondary endpoints included appropriate ICD shock, VT storm, procedural complications, and mortality. Sensitivity analysis, meta-regression, and evaluation of bias were performed. RESULTS: Four RCTs (n = 505) fulfilled inclusion criteria. During follow-up (mean >22 months for all RCTs), preventive ablation was associated with a significant reduction in ICD therapies (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.53 [0.36–0.78]). The occurrence of ICD shocks and VT storm were also significantly reduced in the preventive ablation group. Among patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >30%, preventive ablation was associated with marked reduction in ICD therapy when compared to deferred ablation (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.37 [0.19–0.72]). Overall, there was no difference in mortality between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Preventive catheter ablation in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy decreases ICD therapies, ICD shocks, and VT storm without increasing complications, particularly in patients with LVEF >30%. However, early preventive ablation is not associated with any benefit in mortality. Elsevier 2020-08-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8183888/ /pubmed/34113881 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hroo.2020.08.001 Text en © 2020 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Clinical
Kampaktsis, Polydoros N.
Doulamis, Ilias P.
Tzani, Aspasia
Cheung, Jim W.
Preventive versus deferred catheter ablation of myocardial infarct–associated ventricular tachycardia: A meta-analysis
title Preventive versus deferred catheter ablation of myocardial infarct–associated ventricular tachycardia: A meta-analysis
title_full Preventive versus deferred catheter ablation of myocardial infarct–associated ventricular tachycardia: A meta-analysis
title_fullStr Preventive versus deferred catheter ablation of myocardial infarct–associated ventricular tachycardia: A meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Preventive versus deferred catheter ablation of myocardial infarct–associated ventricular tachycardia: A meta-analysis
title_short Preventive versus deferred catheter ablation of myocardial infarct–associated ventricular tachycardia: A meta-analysis
title_sort preventive versus deferred catheter ablation of myocardial infarct–associated ventricular tachycardia: a meta-analysis
topic Clinical
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8183888/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34113881
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hroo.2020.08.001
work_keys_str_mv AT kampaktsispolydorosn preventiveversusdeferredcatheterablationofmyocardialinfarctassociatedventriculartachycardiaametaanalysis
AT doulamisiliasp preventiveversusdeferredcatheterablationofmyocardialinfarctassociatedventriculartachycardiaametaanalysis
AT tzaniaspasia preventiveversusdeferredcatheterablationofmyocardialinfarctassociatedventriculartachycardiaametaanalysis
AT cheungjimw preventiveversusdeferredcatheterablationofmyocardialinfarctassociatedventriculartachycardiaametaanalysis