Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2023
Efficacy and safety of catheter ablation as first-line therapy for the management of ventricular tachycardia.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kotake Yasuhito, Huang Kaimin, Bennett Richard, De Silva Kasun, Bhaskaran Ashwin, Kanawati Juliana, Turnbull Samual, Zhou Julia, Campbell Timothy, Kumar Saurabh
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is associated with significantly increased morbidity and mortality. Catheter ablation (CA) in line with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is highly effective in VT management; however, it is unknown if CA should be considered as first-line therapy. The aim of this study is to verify the efficacy and safety of CA as first-line therapy for the first VT presentation (as adjunctive to ICD insertion), compared to initial ICD insertion and anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy.
METHODS: Data from patients with the first presentation for VT from January 2017 to January 2021 was reviewed. Patients were classified as "ablation first" vs "ICD first" groups and compared the clinical outcomes between groups.
RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-four consecutive patients presented with VT; 34 underwent CA as first-line therapy prior to ICD insertion, and 150 had ICD insertion/AAD therapy as first-line. During the median follow-up of 625 days, patients who underwent CA as first-line therapy had significantly higher ventricular arrhythmia (VA)-free survival (91% vs 59%, log-rank P = 0.002) and composite of VA recurrence, cardiovascular hospitalization, transplant, and death (84% vs 54%, log-rank P = 0.01) compared to those who did not undergo CA. Multivariate analysis revealed that first-line CA was the only protective predictor of VA recurrence (hazard ratio (HR) 0.20, P = 0.003). There were 3 (9%) peri-procedural complications with no peri-procedural deaths.
CONCLUSION: Real-world data supports the efficacy and safety of CA as first-line therapy at the time of the first VT hospitalization, compared to the initial ICD implant and AAD therapy.
METHODS: Data from patients with the first presentation for VT from January 2017 to January 2021 was reviewed. Patients were classified as "ablation first" vs "ICD first" groups and compared the clinical outcomes between groups.
RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-four consecutive patients presented with VT; 34 underwent CA as first-line therapy prior to ICD insertion, and 150 had ICD insertion/AAD therapy as first-line. During the median follow-up of 625 days, patients who underwent CA as first-line therapy had significantly higher ventricular arrhythmia (VA)-free survival (91% vs 59%, log-rank P = 0.002) and composite of VA recurrence, cardiovascular hospitalization, transplant, and death (84% vs 54%, log-rank P = 0.01) compared to those who did not undergo CA. Multivariate analysis revealed that first-line CA was the only protective predictor of VA recurrence (hazard ratio (HR) 0.20, P = 0.003). There were 3 (9%) peri-procedural complications with no peri-procedural deaths.
CONCLUSION: Real-world data supports the efficacy and safety of CA as first-line therapy at the time of the first VT hospitalization, compared to the initial ICD implant and AAD therapy.