Arrhythmias & electrophysiologyRandomised controlled trial

Can ICD Electrograms Help Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation?

J Am Coll CardiolPublished

  • Randomised controlled trial
  • multicentre
  • 1:1 randomisation

Authors' conclusion

In patients with structural heart disease and ICD-documented SMVT, using ICD-EG information during the ablation procedure to focalize ablation toward the clinical ventricular tachycardia is associated with a nonsignificant decrease in SMVT recurrence rate, a significant reduction in the number of ventricular tachycardia episodes, and a lower rate of arrhythmic storm.

Study context

Population
Patients with structural heart disease and sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (SMVT) documented by an ICD-EG, undergoing ablation
Participants
260 patients · 15 centres
Comparison
Ablation guided by ICD electrogram data vs conventional ablation
Primary endpoint
SMVT recurrence
Follow-up
Within 6 months postablation

Primary result

As reported in the abstract

6 months postablation

Hazard ratio

0.73

95% CI 0.49–1.07

P = 0.11

Events by treatment group

Intervention vs Conventional
HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.49–1.07); P = 0.11

Further findings

OutcomeInterventionConventionalHR (95% CI)P value
Number of SMVT episodes · significantly lower in intervention0.45 (0.24–0.84)P = 0.013
Electrical storm23%41%0.54 (0.34–0.85)P = 0.007

SMVT recurrence, per-protocol analysis · 6 months postablation

Per-protocol SMVT recurrence reached statistical significance: HR
0.66 (95% CI 0.44-0.99)
P
P = 0.045

SMVT recurrence, entire follow-up (44 ± 29 months)

SMVT recurrence, intervention vs conventional (as printed in order)
67% and 76%
HR (95% CI 0.60-1.08), P = 0.14
0.80

ICD shocks

No differences in ICD shocks

Acute efficacy

No differences in acute efficacy

Original publication

Can ICD Electrograms Help Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation? J Am Coll Cardiol. Published 8 January 2025. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2024.10.104

Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it