The efficacy of catheter ablation versus ICD for prevention of ventricular tachycardia in patients with ischemic heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Catheter ablation as first-line treatment for ventricular tachycardia in patients with structural heart disease and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of catheter ablation as the first-line treatment of ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with structural heart disease (SHD) and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Patients with SHD are particularly susceptible to VT, a condition that increases the risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) can terminate VT and prevent SCD but do not prevent VT recurrence. The efficacy and safety of CA as a first-line treatment in SHD patients with preserved LVEF remain unclear. We searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL for studies reporting the outcomes of CA therapy in patients with VT and preserved LVEF, published up to January 19, 2023. The primary outcome was the incidence of SCD following catheter ablation as the first-line treatment of VT in patients with SHD and preserved LVEF. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, VT recurrence, procedural complications, CA success rate, and ICD implantation after catheter ablation. We included seven studies in the meta-analysis, encompassing a total of 920 patients. The pooled success rate of catheter ablation was 84.6% (95% CI 67.2-93.6). Complications occurred in 6.4% (95% CI 4.0-9.9) of patients, and 13.9% (95% CI 10.1-18.8) required ICD implantation after ablation. VT recurrence was observed in 23.2% (95% CI 14.8-34.6) of patients, while the rate of sudden cardiac death (SCD) was 3.1% (95% CI 1.7-5.6). The overall prevalence of all-cause mortality in this population was 5% (95% CI 1.8-13). CA appears promising as a first-line VT treatment in patients with SHD and preserved LVEF, especially for monomorphic hemodynamically tolerated VT. However, due to the lack of direct comparisons with ICDs and anti-arrhythmic drugs, further research is needed to confirm these findings.

Ventricular tachycardia ablation as an alternative to implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in patients with preserved ejection fraction: current status and future prospects

INTRODUCTION

The occurrence of a sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia in patients with structural heart disease is a class 1 indication for ICD because of the expected relevant risk of sudden death. However, if this concerns selected patients with preserved left ventricular function and well-tolerated arrhythmias is still poorly known.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, we review the available data about the natural history of nonimplanted patients with structural heart disease and sustained ventricular tachycardia and the possible role of catheter ablation alone in this population.

EXPERT OPINION

In structural heart disease patients with well-tolerated sustained ventricular tachycardia and preserved LVEF, catheter ablation alone, without ICD implantation, does not seem to carry an important risk of sudden death and the prognosis of these patients is mainly nonarrhythmic. Randomized prospective trials are urgently needed for evaluating the place of first choice ablation without ICD implantation in these populations.