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.

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.