-
Journal of Cardiovascular... Mar 2022Ethanol ablation (EA) is an alternative option for subjects with ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) refractory to conventional medical and ablative treatment. However, data... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Ethanol ablation (EA) is an alternative option for subjects with ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) refractory to conventional medical and ablative treatment. However, data on the efficacy and safety of EA remain sparse.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted. The primary outcomes were 1) freedom from the targeted VA and 2) freedom from any VAs post-EA. Additional safety outcomes were also analyzed.
RESULTS
Ten studies were selected accounting for a population of 174 patients (62.3 ± 12.5 years, 94% male) undergoing 185 procedures. The overall acute success rate of EA was 72.4% (confidence interval [CI ]: 65.6-78.4). After a mean follow-up of 11.3 ± 5.5 months, the incidence of relapse of the targeted VA was 24.4% (CI : 17.1-32.8), while any VAs post-EA occurred in 41.3% (CI : 33.7-49.1). The overall incidence of procedural complications was 14.1% (CI : 9.8-19.8), with pericardial complications and complete atrioventricular block being the most frequent. An anterograde transarterial approach was associated with a higher rate of VA recurrences and complications compared to a retrograde transvenous route; however, differences in the baseline population characteristics and in the targeted ventricular areas should be accounted.
CONCLUSION
EA is a valuable therapeutic option for VAs refractory to conventional treatment and can result in 1-year freedom from VA recurrence in 60%-75% of the patients. However, anatomical or technical challenges preclude acute success in almost 30% of the candidates and the rate of complication is not insignificant, highlighting the importance of well-informed patient selection. The certainty of the evidence is low, and further research is necessary.
Topics: Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Catheter Ablation; Ethanol; Female; Heart Ventricles; Humans; Male; Retrospective Studies; Tachycardia, Ventricular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34921464
DOI: 10.1111/jce.15336 -
JAMA Mar 2002Throughout the past 40 years, a vast and sometimes contradictory literature has accumulated regarding hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), a genetic cardiac disease caused... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Throughout the past 40 years, a vast and sometimes contradictory literature has accumulated regarding hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), a genetic cardiac disease caused by a variety of mutations in genes encoding sarcomeric proteins and characterized by a broad and expanding clinical spectrum.
OBJECTIVES
To clarify and summarize the relevant clinical issues and to profile rapidly evolving concepts regarding HCM.
DATA SOURCES
Systematic analysis of the relevant HCM literature, accessed through MEDLINE (1966-2000), bibliographies, and interactions with investigators.
STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION
Diverse information was assimilated into a rigorous and objective contemporary description of HCM, affording greatest weight to prospective, controlled, and evidence-based studies.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is a relatively common genetic cardiac disease (1:500 in the general population) that is heterogeneous with respect to disease-causing mutations, presentation, prognosis, and treatment strategies. Visibility attached to HCM relates largely to its recognition as the most common cause of sudden death in the young (including competitive athletes). Clinical diagnosis is by 2-dimensional echocardiographic identification of otherwise unexplained left ventricular wall thickening in the presence of a nondilated cavity. Overall, HCM confers an annual mortality rate of about 1% and in most patients is compatible with little or no disability and normal life expectancy. Subsets with higher mortality or morbidity are linked to the complications of sudden death, progressive heart failure, and atrial fibrillation with embolic stroke. Treatment strategies depend on appropriate patient selection, including drug treatment for exertional dyspnea (beta-blockers, verapamil, disopyramide) and the septal myotomy-myectomy operation, which is the standard of care for severe refractory symptoms associated with marked outflow obstruction; alcohol septal ablation and pacing are alternatives to surgery for selected patients. High-risk patients may be treated effectively for sudden death prevention with the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.
CONCLUSIONS
Substantial understanding has evolved regarding the epidemiology and clinical course of HCM, as well as novel treatment strategies that may alter its natural history. An appreciation that HCM, although an important cause of death and disability at all ages, does not invariably convey ominous prognosis and is compatible with normal longevity should dictate a large measure of reassurance for many patients.
Topics: Cardiomyopathy, Hypertrophic; Humans; Phenotype; Prognosis; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 11886323
DOI: 10.1001/jama.287.10.1308 -
Heart Rhythm Jan 2020Patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD) are at risk for ventricular tachycardia (VT). Catheter ablation (CA) may reduce this risk. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD) are at risk for ventricular tachycardia (VT). Catheter ablation (CA) may reduce this risk.
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CA of VT in patients with IHD.
METHODS
Literature searches of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) were performed from January 2000 through April 2018 to identify RCTs comparing a strategy of CA vs no ablation in patients with IHD and an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Outcomes of interest included appropriate ICD therapies, appropriate ICD shocks, VT storm, recurrent VT/ventricular fibrillation (VF), cardiac hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality. Using an inverse variance random-effects model, odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each endpoint.
RESULTS
A total of 5 RCTs (N = 635 patients) were included, with a duration of follow-up ranging from 6 months to 27.9 months. Patients who underwent CA experienced decreased odds of appropriate ICD therapies (OR 0.49; 95% CI 0.28-0.87), appropriate ICD shocks (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.28-0.96), VT storm (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.43-0.95), and cardiac hospitalization (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.46-0.97) vs those who did not undergo ablation. There was no evidence of a benefit for recurrent VT/VF (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.41-1.85), although this endpoint was not reported in all trials, or for all-cause mortality (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.60-1.34).
CONCLUSION
In this systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs, CA was associated with a significant reduction in the odds of appropriate ICD therapies, appropriate ICD shocks, VT storm, and cardiac hospitalizations in patients with IHD.
Topics: Catheter Ablation; Humans; Myocardial Ischemia; Tachycardia, Ventricular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31082362
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.04.024 -
Journal of Geriatric Cardiology : JGC Nov 2020Catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) has significantly evolved over the past...
BACKGROUND
Catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) has significantly evolved over the past decade. However, different ablation strategies showed inconsistency in acute and long-term outcomes.
METHODS
We searched the databases of Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library through October 17, 2019 for studies describing the clinical outcomes of VT ablation in ARVC. Data including VT recurrence, all-cause mortality, acute procedural efficacy and major procedural complications were extracted. A meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis was further performed in comparative studies of endo-epicardial versus endocardial-only ablation.
RESULTS
A total of 24 studies with 717 participants were enrolled. The literatures of epicardial ablation were mainly published after 2010 with total ICD implantation of 73.7%, acute efficacy of 89.8%, major complication of 5.2%, follow-up of 28.9 months, VT freedom of 75.3%, all-cause mortality of 1.1% and heart transplantation of 0.6%. Meta-analysis of 10 comparative studies revealed that compared with endocardial-only approach, epicardial ablation significantly decreased VT recurrence (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.30-0.85; = 0.010), but somehow increased major procedural complications (OR: 4.64; 95% CI: 1.28-16.92; = 0.02), with not evident improvement of acute efficacy (OR: 2.74; 95% CI: 0.98-7.65; = 0.051) or all-cause mortality (OR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.09-8.31; = 0.90).
CONCLUSION
Catheter ablation for VT in ARVC is feasible and effective. Epicardial ablation is associated with better long-term VT freedom, but with more major complications and unremarkable survival or acute efficacy benefit.
PubMed: 33343648
DOI: 10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2020.11.001 -
Journal of Interventional Cardiac... Jan 2022Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) is associated with potential major complications, including mortality. The risk of acute complications in patients with...
BACKGROUND
Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) is associated with potential major complications, including mortality. The risk of acute complications in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) has not been systematically evaluated.
METHODS
PubMed was searched for studies of catheter ablation of VT published between September 2009 and September 2019. Pre-specified primary outcomes were (1) rate of major acute complications, including death, and (2) mortality rate.
RESULTS
A total of 7395 references were evaluated for relevance. From this, 50 studies with a total of 3833 patients undergoing 4319 VT ablation procedures fulfilled the inclusion criteria (mean age 59 years; male 82%; 2363 [62%] ICM; 1470 [38%] NICM). The overall major complication rate in ICM cohorts was 9.4% (95% CI, 8.1-10.7) and NICM cohorts was 7.1% (95% CI, 6.0-8.3). Reported complication rates were highly variable between studies (ICM I = 90%; NICM I = 89%). Vascular complications (ICM 2.5% [95% CI, 1.9-3.1]; NICM 1.2% [95% CI, 0.7-1.7]) and cerebrovascular events (ICM 0.5% [95% CI, 0.2-0.7]; NICM, 0.1% [95% CI, 0-0.2]) were significantly higher in ICM cohorts. Acute mortality rates in the ICM and NICM cohorts were low (ICM 0.9% [95% CI, 0.5-1.3]; NICM 0.6% [95% CI, 0.3-1.0]) with the majority of overall deaths (ICM 75%; NICM 80%) due to either recurrent VT or cardiogenic shock.
CONCLUSION
Overall acute complication rates of VT ablation are comparable between ICM and NICM patients. However, the pattern and predictors of complications vary depending on the underlying cardiomyopathy.
Topics: Cardiomyopathies; Catheter Ablation; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Myocardial Ischemia; Tachycardia, Ventricular
PubMed: 33512605
DOI: 10.1007/s10840-021-00948-6 -
The Canadian Journal of Cardiology Mar 2023Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks are associated with higher rates of mortality and reduced quality of life. In this study we aimed to investigate the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks are associated with higher rates of mortality and reduced quality of life. In this study we aimed to investigate the effectiveness of catheter ablation (CA) of ventricular tachycardia in patients with an ICD.
METHODS
An electronic literature search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials that compared CA vs control. The primary outcomes were recurrence of ventricular arrhythmia (ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation) and mortality. Kaplan-Meier curves for these outcomes were digitized to obtain individual patient data, which were pooled in a 1-stage meta-analysis to determine hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Secondary outcomes included cardiac hospitalization, electrical storm, syncope, appropriate ICD therapies, appropriate ICD shocks, and inappropriate shocks. For these, study-level HRs or risk ratios were obtained and pooled in random effects meta-analyses. Subgroup analysis was performed for trials that investigated prophylactic CA (before or during ICD implantation).
RESULTS
Data on 9 studies and 1103 patients were retrieved. CA significantly reduced ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation recurrence compared with control (shared frailty HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.49-0.81; P < 0.001) but not mortality (shared frailty HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.57-1.23; P = 0.361). CA was associated with significantly lower rates of cardiac hospitalization, electrical storm, appropriate ICD therapies and shocks, but not syncope or inappropriate shocks. Subgroup analysis showed similar results for prophylactic CA except that no significant difference was observed for cardiac hospitalizations.
CONCLUSIONS
CA is associated with reduced ventricular arrhythmia recurrence, appropriate ICD therapies/shocks, electrical storm, and cardiac hospitalization, and might be effective in preventing future morbidity. Future trials are needed to support the continued benefit of these promising results, and to investigate the optimal timing of ablation.
Topics: Humans; Defibrillators, Implantable; Ventricular Fibrillation; Frailty; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome; Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Tachycardia, Ventricular; Catheter Ablation
PubMed: 36521729
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2022.12.004 -
Heart, Lung & Circulation Aug 2022There are differences in substrate and ablation approaches for ventricular tachycardia (VT) in ischaemic (ICM) and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
There are differences in substrate and ablation approaches for ventricular tachycardia (VT) in ischaemic (ICM) and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM).
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing clinical and procedural characteristics/outcomes of VT ablation in ICM versus NICM.
METHODS
Electronic databases were searched for comparative studies reporting outcomes of VT ablation in patients with ICM and NICM. Primary outcomes were acute procedural success, VT recurrence and long-term mortality. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects modelling.
RESULTS
Thirty-one (31) studies (7,473 patients; 4,418 ICM and 3,055 NICM) were included. Patients with ICM were significantly older (67.0 vs 55.3 yrs), more commonly male (89% vs 79%), had lower left ventricular ejection fraction (29% vs 38%) were less likely to undergo epicardial access (11% vs 36%) and were more likely to require haemodynamic support during ablation (relative risk [RR] 1.30; 95% CI 1.01-1.69). Acute procedural success (i.e. non-inducibility of VT) was higher in the ICM cohort (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05-1.15). Recurrence of VT at follow-up was significantly lower in the ICM cohort (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.70-0.84). Peri-procedural mortality, incidence of procedural complications and long-term mortality were not significantly different between the cohorts.
CONCLUSIONS
NICM and ICM patients undergoing VT ablation are fundamentally different in their clinical characteristics, ablation approaches, acute procedural outcomes and likelihood of VA recurrence. VT ablation in NICM has a lower likelihood of procedural success with increased risk of VA recurrence, consistent with known challenging arrhythmia substrate.
Topics: Cardiomyopathies; Catheter Ablation; Humans; Male; Myocardial Ischemia; Recurrence; Stroke Volume; Tachycardia, Ventricular; Treatment Outcome; Ventricular Function, Left
PubMed: 35643798
DOI: 10.1016/j.hlc.2022.02.014 -
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine 2022To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of available trials regarding the outcomes of ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation in patients with non-ischemic...
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of available trials regarding the outcomes of ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation in patients with non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NIDCM).
METHODS
A comprehensive database search of large four electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Institute for Scientific Information network meta-analysis, identified five studies enrolling 666 patients for patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDCM) underwent catheter ablation (CA) for VT. The short-term outcomes assessed included procedural success, VT non-inducibility and procedural complications, whereas the long-term outcomes assessed included VT recurrence, heart transplantation, antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD) use after ablation and death.
RESULTS
A total of 5 observational studies reported outcomes in 666 patients with NIDCM undergoing VT CA. The complete procedural success was moderately high; 65.5% of the patients (95% CI 0.402- 0.857, < 0.001) and the procedural complications occurred in 5.8% of the patients (95% CI 0.040-0.076, = 0.685). Epicardial mapping and ablation were performed among 61.5% and 37% of patients with NIDCM respectively. During a follow up period of 12 to 45 months, there were VT recurrence in 34.2% of the patients (95% CI 0.301-0.465, < 0.080), death in 20.2% of the patients (95% CI 0.059-0.283, < 0.017) and heart transplantation in 12.9% of the patients (95% CI -0.026-0.245, < 0.012).
CONCLUSION
Ventricular tachycardia CA is effective and safe approach for management of patients with NIDCM with the epicardial approach to be considered as initial strategy especially in presence of ECG and CMR findings suggestive of epicardial substrate. A multicenter randomized trial is crucial to look at the short- and long-term outcomes of VT ablation in NIDCM especially with the advances in mapping and ablation techniques and predictors of success.
PubMed: 36440030
DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.1007392 -
Journal of Interventional Cardiac... Nov 2018Catheter ablation is proven to be an effective strategy for drug refractory ventricular tachycardia (VT) in ischemic cardiomyopathy. However, the appropriate timing of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Catheter ablation is proven to be an effective strategy for drug refractory ventricular tachycardia (VT) in ischemic cardiomyopathy. However, the appropriate timing of VT ablation and identifying the group of patients that may receive the greatest benefit remains uncertain. There is limited data on the effect on prophylactic catheter ablation (PCA) in the prevention of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy, electrical storm, and mortality.
METHODS
We performed a comprehensive literature search through November 1, 2017, for all eligible studies comparing PCA + ICD versus ICD only in eligible patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Clinical outcomes included all ICD therapies including ICD shocks and electrical storm. Additional outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and complications.
RESULTS
Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (N = 346) met inclusion criteria. PCA was associated with a significantly lower ICD therapies (OR 0.49; CI 0.28 to 0.87; p = 0.01) including ICD shocks [OR 0.38; CI 0.22 to 0.64; p = 0.0003) and electrical storm (OR 0.55; CI 0.30 to 1.01; p = 0.05) when compared with ICD only. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (OR 0.77; CI 0.41 to 1.46; p = 0.42), cardiovascular mortality (OR 0.49; CI 0.16 to 1.50; p = 0.21), and major adverse events (OR 1.45; CI 0.52 to 4.01; p = 0.47) between two groups.
CONCLUSION
These results suggest prophylactic catheter ablation decreases ICD therapies, including shocks and electrical storm with no improvement in overall mortality. There is a need for future carefully designed randomized clinical trials.
Topics: Aged; Cardiomyopathies; Catheter Ablation; Defibrillators, Implantable; Electrocardiography; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Myocardial Ischemia; Primary Prevention; Prognosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Tachycardia, Ventricular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29680972
DOI: 10.1007/s10840-018-0376-5 -
Journal of Interventional Cardiac... Aug 2019There is a lack of compelling data regarding the benefit of percutaneous ventricular assist devices (PVAD) in patients undergoing ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
There is a lack of compelling data regarding the benefit of percutaneous ventricular assist devices (PVAD) in patients undergoing ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation. The study aims to conduct a meta-analysis comparing the safety and efficacy of PVAD versus no-PVAD (N-PVAD) during VT ablation.
METHODS
Studies meeting criteria were systematically reviewed. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were extracted and analyzed. A meta-analysis was performed using random-effects model to calculate risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
The meta-analysis included five retrospective, observational studies consisting of 2026 patients (PVAD group-284 patients versus N-PVAD group-1742 patients). The PVAD group was sicker with significantly higher VT storm, lower LVEF and greater proportion of NYHA class ≥ III than N-PVAD (p < 0.050). The acute procedural success [RR 0.95, 95% CI, (0.89-1.00), p = 0.070], VT recurrence [RR 0.94, 95% CI, (0.66-1.34), p = 0.740] and mortality [RR 1.28, 95% CI, (0.43-3.83), p = 0.660] were similar on follow-up between PVAD versus N-PVAD. PVAD group also had significantly higher complications [RR 1.83, 95% CI (1.21-2.76), p = 0.004] and longer fluoroscopy [MD + 7.31 min, 95% CI (0.91-13.71), p = 0.030] and procedure time [MD + 71.41 min, 95% CI (31.67-111.14), p < 0.001] than N-PVAD.
CONCLUSION
Patients receiving PVAD support during VT ablation were sicker with no significant difference in acute procedural success, VT recurrence, and mortality compared with N-PVAD. PVAD support was also associated with higher complications and longer fluoroscopy and procedure time. A prospective randomized controlled trial will identify if using PVAD support in unstable patients undergoing VT ablation will impact clinical outcomes.
Topics: Catheter Ablation; Heart-Assist Devices; Humans; Tachycardia, Ventricular
PubMed: 30377926
DOI: 10.1007/s10840-018-0477-1