TY - JOUR
T1 - Combined Endocardial-Epicardial Versus Endocardial Catheter Ablation Alone for Ventricular Tachycardia in Structural Heart Disease
T2 - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
AU - Romero, Jorge
AU - Cerrud-Rodriguez, Roberto C.
AU - Di Biase, Luigi
AU - Diaz, Juan Carlos
AU - Alviz, Isabella
AU - Grupposo, Vito
AU - Cerna, Luis
AU - Avendano, Ricardo
AU - Tedrow, Usha
AU - Natale, Andrea
AU - Tung, Roderick
AU - Kumar, Saurabh
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr. Di Biase is a consultant for Biosense Webster, Stereoataxis, Boston Scientific, and St. Jude Medical; and has received speaker and travel honoraria from Medtronic, Atricure, EPiEP, and Biotronik. Dr. Tedrow is a consultant for Boston Scientific and Abbott; and has received research funding from Biosense Webster and Abbott. Dr. Grupposo is an employee of CAS Biosense Webster; and has financial relationships with Abbott, Medtronic, and Biosense Webster. Dr. Natale is a consultant for Biosense Webster, St. Jude/Abbott, Medtronic, and Biotronik. Dr Tung has received research grants from Abbott. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose. Francis Marchlinski, MD, served as Guest Editor for this paper.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019
PY - 2019/1
Y1 - 2019/1
N2 - Objectives: This study sought to determine whether combined endocardial-epicardial (endo-epi) ablation was superior to endocardial only ablation in patients with scar-related ventricular tachycardia (VT). Background: Limited single-center studies suggest that combined endo-epi ablation strategy may be superior to endocardial ablation (endo) alone in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC), and ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). Methods: A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane, and Embase databases was performed for studies that reported outcomes comparing endo-epi with endo VT ablation alone. Results: Seventeen studies consisting of 975 patients were included (mean 56 ± 10 years of age; 79% male; NICM in 36.6%; ICM in 32.8%; and ARVC in 30.6%). After a mean follow-up of 27 ± 21 months, endo-epi ablation was associated with a 35% reduction in risk of VT recurrence compared with endocardial ablation alone (risk ratio [RR]: 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55 to 0.78; p < 0.001). Sensitivity analysis showed lower risk of VT recurrence in ICM (RR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.67; p = 0.0002) and ARVC (RR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.82; p = 0.0002), with a nonsignificant trend in NICM (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.08; p = 0.20). Endo-epi, compared with endo ablation, was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.97; p = 0.04). Acute procedural complications were higher with the endo-epi approach (RR: 2.62; 95% CI: 0.91 to 7.52; p = 0.07). Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that a combined endo-epi ablation is associated with a lower risk of VT recurrence and subsequent mortality than endo only VT ablation in patients with scar-related VT. Procedural complications, however, are higher with the endo-epi approach.
AB - Objectives: This study sought to determine whether combined endocardial-epicardial (endo-epi) ablation was superior to endocardial only ablation in patients with scar-related ventricular tachycardia (VT). Background: Limited single-center studies suggest that combined endo-epi ablation strategy may be superior to endocardial ablation (endo) alone in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC), and ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). Methods: A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane, and Embase databases was performed for studies that reported outcomes comparing endo-epi with endo VT ablation alone. Results: Seventeen studies consisting of 975 patients were included (mean 56 ± 10 years of age; 79% male; NICM in 36.6%; ICM in 32.8%; and ARVC in 30.6%). After a mean follow-up of 27 ± 21 months, endo-epi ablation was associated with a 35% reduction in risk of VT recurrence compared with endocardial ablation alone (risk ratio [RR]: 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55 to 0.78; p < 0.001). Sensitivity analysis showed lower risk of VT recurrence in ICM (RR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.67; p = 0.0002) and ARVC (RR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.82; p = 0.0002), with a nonsignificant trend in NICM (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.08; p = 0.20). Endo-epi, compared with endo ablation, was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.97; p = 0.04). Acute procedural complications were higher with the endo-epi approach (RR: 2.62; 95% CI: 0.91 to 7.52; p = 0.07). Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that a combined endo-epi ablation is associated with a lower risk of VT recurrence and subsequent mortality than endo only VT ablation in patients with scar-related VT. Procedural complications, however, are higher with the endo-epi approach.
KW - VT recurrence
KW - arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy
KW - catheter ablation
KW - endocardial ablation
KW - epicardial ablation
KW - ischemic cardiomyopathy
KW - nonischemic cardiomyopathy
KW - structural heart disease
KW - ventricular tachycardia
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85059781558&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85059781558&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jacep.2018.08.010
DO - 10.1016/j.jacep.2018.08.010
M3 - Article
C2 - 30678778
AN - SCOPUS:85059781558
SN - 2405-500X
VL - 5
SP - 13
EP - 24
JO - JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology
JF - JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology
IS - 1
ER -