Arrhythmias & electrophysiology
Ventricular Tachycardia and Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) Therapy Burden With Catheter Ablation Versus Escalated Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy
Authors' conclusion
Among patients with AAD-refractory VT and a previous MI, catheter ablation reduced shock-treated VT event burden and appropriate shock burden compared with escalated AAD therapy.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with previous myocardial infarction (MI) and ventricular tachycardia (VT) despite initial antiarrhythmic drug therapy259 enrolled
- Participants
- 132 vs 129
- Comparison
- Catheter ablation vs escalated AAD therapy
- Ablationn = 132
- Escalated AADn = 129reference
- Primary endpoint
- VT burden (VT events treated with ≥1 appropriate ICD therapy) and appropriate ICD therapy burden (shocks or antitachycardia pacing delivered)
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
23.4 months of follow-up
Shock-treated VT event burden lower with ablation vs escalated AAD
40%
Appropriate shock burden lower with ablation vs escalated AAD
39%
Further findings
VT burden, ATP-treated VT event burden, appropriate ATP burden (amiodarone-refractory VT stratum)
- Reduction with ablation only in amiodarone-refractory VT stratum
- P < 0.05 for all
Original publication
Ventricular Tachycardia and ICD Therapy Burden With Catheter Ablation Versus Escalated Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. Published 22 March 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →