Outcomes of a combined vs non-combined endoepicardial ventricular
tachycardia ablation strategy
Abstract
BACKGROUND Direct comparisons of combined (C-ABL) and non-combined
(NC-ABL) endo-epicardial ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation outcomes
are scarce. We aimed to investigate the long-term clinical efficacy and
safety of these 2 strategies in ischemic heart disease (IHD) and
nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) patients. METHODS Multicentric
observational registry including 316 consecutive patients who underwent
catheter ablation for drug-resistant VT between January 2008 and July
2019. Primary and secondary efficacy endpoints were defined as VT-free
survival and all-cause death after ablation. Safety outcomes were
defined by 30-days mortality and procedure-related complications.
RESULTS Most of the patients were male (85%), with IHD (67%) and mean
age of 63±13 years. During a mean follow-up of 3±2 years, 117 (37%)
patients had VT recurrence and 73 (23%) died. Multivariate survival
analysis identified electrical storm (ES) at presentation, IHD, left
ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), New York Heart Association (NYHA)
class III/IV, and C-ABL as independent predictors of VT recurrence. In
135 patients undergoing repeated procedures, only C-ABL and ES were
independent predictors of relapse. The independent predictors of
mortality were C-ABL, ES, LVEF, age and NYHA class III/IV. C-ABL
survival benefit was only seen in patients with a previous ablation (P
for interaction=0.04). Mortality at 30-days was similar between NC-ABL
and C-ABL (4% vs. 2%, respectively, P=0.777), as was complication rate
(10.3% vs. 15.1% respectively, P=0.336). CONCLUSION A combined
endo-epicardial approach was associated with greater VT-free survival
and lower all-cause death in IHD and NICM patients undergoing repeated
VT catheter ablations. Both strategies seem equally safe.