Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in patients with electrical storm, with a special focus on patients with Chagas disease.
Catheter ablation
Chagas disease
Electrical storm
Ventricular tachycardia
Journal
Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing
ISSN: 1572-8595
Titre abrégé: J Interv Card Electrophysiol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9708966
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2021
Dec 2021
Historique:
received:
16
08
2020
accepted:
08
11
2020
pubmed:
10
1
2021
medline:
15
12
2021
entrez:
9
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There are few reports on the benefits of catheter ablation (CA) in patients with electrical storm (ES). None of these publications included patients with Chagas disease (ChD). Our aims are to analyze (1) all the cases of ES treated with CA and (2) the subgroup of patients with ChD. Prospective analysis of consecutive patients with ES due to monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) treated with CA. We included 38 patients: 28 males; median age of 63.5 (IQR 55-71) years old; ejection fraction (LVEF) 0.30 (0.25-0.40). Sixteen patients (42.1%) had ChD. The patients experienced 21 (15-37) VT episodes and received 7 (3-13) ICD shocks before CA. Forty-six procedures were performed (7 required epicardial access). All patients experienced ES suppression after CA. After 35 (10-64) months of follow-up (1.21 procedures per patient), 23 patients (60.5%) remain free from any VT; 35 patients (92.1%) were free from ES, and 11 patients (28.9%) died from non-arrhythmic causes. One patient underwent heart transplantation. Patients with ChD were younger (60 vs. 67 years old; p = 0.033), significantly more women (50% vs. 9.1%; p = 0.005), and had higher LVEF (0.40 vs. 0.28; p < 0.001) than the other patients. Long-term outcome of ChD patients was similar to that of the overall population. Only age and LVEF independently predicted mortality. CA was associated with acute ventricular arrhythmia suppression in all patients with ES. Freedom rates from ES and VT were 92.1% and 60.5% respectively. Despite having a lower-risk clinical profile, patients with ChD had a comparable outcome to that of the other patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There are few reports on the benefits of catheter ablation (CA) in patients with electrical storm (ES). None of these publications included patients with Chagas disease (ChD). Our aims are to analyze (1) all the cases of ES treated with CA and (2) the subgroup of patients with ChD.
METHODS
METHODS
Prospective analysis of consecutive patients with ES due to monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) treated with CA.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We included 38 patients: 28 males; median age of 63.5 (IQR 55-71) years old; ejection fraction (LVEF) 0.30 (0.25-0.40). Sixteen patients (42.1%) had ChD. The patients experienced 21 (15-37) VT episodes and received 7 (3-13) ICD shocks before CA. Forty-six procedures were performed (7 required epicardial access). All patients experienced ES suppression after CA. After 35 (10-64) months of follow-up (1.21 procedures per patient), 23 patients (60.5%) remain free from any VT; 35 patients (92.1%) were free from ES, and 11 patients (28.9%) died from non-arrhythmic causes. One patient underwent heart transplantation. Patients with ChD were younger (60 vs. 67 years old; p = 0.033), significantly more women (50% vs. 9.1%; p = 0.005), and had higher LVEF (0.40 vs. 0.28; p < 0.001) than the other patients. Long-term outcome of ChD patients was similar to that of the overall population. Only age and LVEF independently predicted mortality.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
CA was associated with acute ventricular arrhythmia suppression in all patients with ES. Freedom rates from ES and VT were 92.1% and 60.5% respectively. Despite having a lower-risk clinical profile, patients with ChD had a comparable outcome to that of the other patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33420714
doi: 10.1007/s10840-020-00915-7
pii: 10.1007/s10840-020-00915-7
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
557-564Informations de copyright
© 2021. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Pacifico A, Ferlic LL, Cedillo-Salazar FR, Nasir N, Doyle TK, Henry PD. Shocks as predictors of survival in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;34(1):204–10.
doi: 10.1016/S0735-1097(99)00142-4
Mitchell LB, Pineda EA, Titus JL, Bartosch PM, Benditt DG. Sudden death in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators: the importance of post-shock electromechanical dissociation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39(8):1323–8.
doi: 10.1016/S0735-1097(02)01784-9
Cronin EM, Bogun FM, Maury P, Peichl P, Chen M, Namboodiri N, et al. 2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias. Eur Eur Pacing Arrhythm Card Electrophysiol J Work Groups Card Pacing Arrhythm Card Cell Electrophysiol Eur Soc Cardiol. 1 2019;21(8):1143-1144.
Exner DV, Pinski SL, Wyse DG, Renfroe EG, Follmann D, Gold M, et al. Electrical storm presages nonsudden death: the antiarrhythmics versus implantable defibrillators (AVID) trial. Circulation. 2001;103(16):2066–71.
doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.103.16.2066
Sesselberg HW, Moss AJ, McNitt S, Zareba W, Daubert JP, Andrews ML, et al. Ventricular arrhythmia storms in postinfarction patients with implantable defibrillators for primary prevention indications: a MADIT-II substudy. Heart Rhythm. 2007;4(11):1395–402.
doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2007.07.013
Guerra F, Shkoza M, Scappini L, Flori M, Capucci A. Role of electrical storm as a mortality and morbidity risk factor and its clinical predictors: a meta-analysis. Europace. 2014;16(3):347–53.
doi: 10.1093/europace/eut304
Sapp JL, Wells GA, Parkash R, Stevenson WG, Blier L, Sarrazin J-F, et al. Ventricular tachycardia ablation versus escalation of antiarrhythmic drugs. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(2):111–21.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1513614
Dinov B, Fiedler L, Schönbauer R, Bollmann A, Rolf S, Piorkowski C, et al. Outcomes in catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in dilated nonischemic cardiomyopathy compared with ischemic cardiomyopathy: results from the Prospective Heart Centre of Leipzig VT (HELP-VT) Study. Circulation. 2014;129(7):728–36.
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.003063
Hoskins MH, Merchant FM, Patel AM. Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia as an adjunct therapy to reduce ICD shocks. J Innov Card Rhythm Manag. 2015;6:2125–35.
Tung R, Vaseghi M, Frankel DS, Vergara P, Di Biase L, Nagashima K, et al. Freedom from recurrent ventricular tachycardia after catheter ablation is associated with improved survival in patients with structural heart disease: an International VT Ablation Center Collaborative Group study. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12(9):1997–2007.
doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.05.036
Pisani CF, Romero J, Lara S, Hardy C, Chokr M, Sacilotto L, et al. Efficacy and safety of combined endocardial/epicardial catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia in Chagas disease: A randomized controlled study. Heart Rhythm. 2020;17(9):1510–8.
doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.02.009
Vergara P, Tung R, Vaseghi M, Brombin C, Frankel DS, Di Biase L, et al. Successful ventricular tachycardia ablation in patients with electrical storm reduces recurrences and improves survival. Heart Rhythm. 2018;15(1):48–55.
doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2017.08.022
Bänsch D, Böcker D, Brunn J, Weber M, Breithardt G, Block M. Clusters of ventricular tachycardias signify impaired survival in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy and implantable cardioverter defibrillators. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36(2):566–73.
doi: 10.1016/S0735-1097(00)00726-9
Israel CW, Barold SS. Electrical storm in patients with an implanted defibrillator: a matter of definition. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2007;12(4):375–82.
doi: 10.1111/j.1542-474X.2007.00187.x
Kozeluhova M, Peichl P, Cihak R, Wichterle D, Vancura V, Bytesnik J, et al. Catheter ablation of electrical storm in patients with structural heart disease. Eur Eur Pacing Arrhythm Card Electrophysiol J Work Groups Card Pacing Arrhythm Card Cell Electrophysiol Eur Soc Cardiol. 2011;13(1):109–13.
Izquierdo M, Ruiz-Granell R, Ferrero A, Martínez A, Sánchez-Gomez J, Bonanad C, et al. Ablation or conservative management of electrical storm due to monomorphic ventricular tachycardia: differences in outcome. Eur Eur Pacing Arrhythm Card Electrophysiol J Work Groups Card Pacing Arrhythm Card Cell Electrophysiol Eur Soc Cardiol. 2012;14(12):1734–9.
Carbucicchio C, Santamaria M, Trevisi N, Maccabelli G, Giraldi F, Fassini G, et al. Catheter ablation for the treatment of electrical storm in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: short- and long-term outcomes in a prospective single-center study. Circulation. 2008;117(4):462–9.
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.686534
Arya A, Bode K, Piorkowski C, Bollmann A, Sommer P, Gaspar T, et al. Catheter ablation of electrical storm due to monomorphic ventricular tachycardia in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy: acute results and its effect on long-term survival. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2010;33(12):1504–9.
doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2010.02835.x
Scanavacca M. Epicardial ablation for ventricular tachycardia in chronic Chagas heart disease. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2014;102(6):524–8.
pubmed: 25004413
pmcid: 4079015
Komatsu Y, Daly M, Sacher F, Cochet H, Denis A, Derval N, et al. Endocardial ablation to eliminate epicardial arrhythmia substrate in scar-related ventricular tachycardia. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(14):1416–26.
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.10.087
Henz BD, do Nascimento TA, Dietrich C de O, Dalegrave C, Hernandes V, Mesas CE, et al. Simultaneous epicardial and endocardial substrate mapping and radiofrequency catheter ablation as first-line treatment for ventricular tachycardia and frequent ICD shocks in chronic chagasic cardiomyopathy. J Interv Card Electrophysiol Int J Arrhythm Pacing. 2009;26(3):195–205.
doi: 10.1007/s10840-009-9433-4
Saenz LC, Corrales FM, Bautista W, Traina M, Meymandi S, Rodriguez DA, et al. Cardiac sympathetic denervation for intractable ventricular arrhythmias in Chagas disease. Heart Rhythm. 2016;13(7):1388–94.
doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.03.014