ScienceMed®

Catheter ablation vs. anti-arrhythmic drug therapy for ventricular tachycardia in ischaemic heart disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Cardiologia
Imagem de arquivo, ilustrativa — não é do estudo. Músculo cardíaco em corte longitudinal, com os discos intercalares, ao microscópio óptico. Berkshire Community College Bioscience Image Library · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons

MetanáliseNível 1 · Evidência consolidadaEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology1 dez 202511 citações

Salvar

Resumo original em inglês

O que aconteceu

Ventricular tachycardia (VT) in ischaemic heart disease (IHD) requires complex management strategies including catheter ablation (CA) and anti-arrhythmic drugs (AADs). The aim of this study is to compare efficacy and safety of CA vs. AADs in patients with IHD and VT.

O que encontraram

We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling patients with IHD and ICD randomized to CA or AADs. Primary outcome was appropriate ICD therapy. Secondary outcomes included inappropriate ICD therapy, cardiovascular (CV) re-hospitalization, all-cause/CV mortality, and adverse events. Subgroup analyses were conducted for amiodarone and sotalol, with an exploratory evaluation of a composite endpoint (ICD shock, VT storm, all-cause death). Four RCTs including 947 patients (mean age 68 ± 2 years; 93% male) were analysed. CA significantly reduced the risk of appropriate ICD therapy compared with AADs (149/470 [31.7%] vs. 229/477 [48.0%]; RR 0.81; 95% CI [0.67, 0.97]; P = 0.02). Among secondary outcomes, CA decreased the incidence of CV re-hospitalization [RR 0.84; 95% CI (0.72, 0.99); P = 0.04] and adverse events [RR 0.42; 95% CI (0.28, 0.62); P < 0.01], while no differences were observed in all-cause/CV mortality and inappropriate ICD therapy. In subgroup analyses, CA was superior to sotalol in reducing the composite endpoint of ICD shock, VT storm and all-cause death [RR: 0.82, 95% CI (0.69, 0.98), P = 0.03]; whereas, no significant benefit was seen compared to amiodarone [RR: 0.92; 95% CI (0.78, 1.09), P = 0.32].

Por que isso importa

In ischaemic heart disease and VT, CA compared with anti-arrhythmic drugs is associated with a reduction of appropriate ICD therapy, cardiovascular re-hospitalization, and adverse events with benefits most evident versus sotalol.

Resumo publicado sob licença CC BY. A tradução para o português ainda não chegou a este estudo.

O estudo original

Catheter ablation vs. anti-arrhythmic drug therapy for ventricular tachycardia in ischaemic heart disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Francesco Santoro, Giacomo Mugnai, Laura Perrotta, Boldizsar Kovacs, Leon Dinshaw, Alvaro Marco Del Castillo, Christiane Jungen, Stefan Kurath-Koller, Stefan Stojković, Bert Vandenberk et al.

Descritores MeSH

  • Catheter Ablation
  • Anti-Arrhythmia Agents
  • Tachycardia, Ventricular
  • Myocardial Ischemia
  • Middle Aged
  • Risk Factors
  • Aged
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Defibrillators, Implantable

Veja também