International journal of cardiology · 2016
Can ventricular tachycardia non-inducibility after ablation predict reduced ventricular tachycardia recurrence and mortality in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy? A meta-analysis of twenty-four observational studies.
СтатьяМетаанализОбзорНазвание 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.
Hu Jinzhu, Zeng Shan, Zhou Qiongqiong, Zhu Wengen, Xu Zhenyan, Yu Jianhua, Hong Kui
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: At present, the role of ventricular tachycardia (VT) non-inducibility after ablation in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis of the published literature to assess whether VT non-inducibility after ablation could predict reduced VT recurrence and mortality in patients with NICM.
METHODS: PubMed, ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane library were searched for studies evaluating the effects of VT non-inducibility after catheter ablation on the long-term outcome in NICM patients with sustained VT. Results were analyzed using a fixed-effect model, and the data were pooled using RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS: Twenty-four observational studies were identified (736 participants, mean follow-up time: 22months). NICM patients with VT inducibility after ablation had a higher risk of VT recurrence (odds ratio [OR]=5.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.07-8.37; P<0.00001) and all-cause mortality (OR=3.55, 95% CI 1.62-7.78; P=0.002) compared with VT non-inducibility. Similarly in the subgroup analysis, patients with VT inducibility showed a higher risk of VT recurrence from non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (OR=3.92, 95% CI 2.36-6.50; P<0.00001) and arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy (OR=5.37, 95% CI 2.20-13.10; P=0.0002). Additionally, meta-analysis also showed that combined endo-epicardial ablation significantly reduced the risk of VT recurrence compared with endocardial-only ablation (OR=2.02, 95% CI 1.19-3.44; P=0.009; mean follow-up time: 22months).
CONCLUSION: Recent evidence has shown that VT non-inducibility after ablation is a predictor for reduced VT recurrence and mortality compared with VT inducibility in NICM patients with sustained VT. In addition, endocardial plus adjuvant epicardial ablation provides better long-term arrhythmia-free survival than endocardial ablation alone.
METHODS: PubMed, ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane library were searched for studies evaluating the effects of VT non-inducibility after catheter ablation on the long-term outcome in NICM patients with sustained VT. Results were analyzed using a fixed-effect model, and the data were pooled using RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS: Twenty-four observational studies were identified (736 participants, mean follow-up time: 22months). NICM patients with VT inducibility after ablation had a higher risk of VT recurrence (odds ratio [OR]=5.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.07-8.37; P<0.00001) and all-cause mortality (OR=3.55, 95% CI 1.62-7.78; P=0.002) compared with VT non-inducibility. Similarly in the subgroup analysis, patients with VT inducibility showed a higher risk of VT recurrence from non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (OR=3.92, 95% CI 2.36-6.50; P<0.00001) and arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy (OR=5.37, 95% CI 2.20-13.10; P=0.0002). Additionally, meta-analysis also showed that combined endo-epicardial ablation significantly reduced the risk of VT recurrence compared with endocardial-only ablation (OR=2.02, 95% CI 1.19-3.44; P=0.009; mean follow-up time: 22months).
CONCLUSION: Recent evidence has shown that VT non-inducibility after ablation is a predictor for reduced VT recurrence and mortality compared with VT inducibility in NICM patients with sustained VT. In addition, endocardial plus adjuvant epicardial ablation provides better long-term arrhythmia-free survival than endocardial ablation alone.