Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
November 1, 2025Clinical CardiologyOpen Access

Catheter ablation for VT electrical storm leaves ~34% of patients requiring subsequent ICD therapies.

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Why the study?

While catheter ablation has emerged as an effective treatment for electrical storm, its long-term outcomes remain unknown.

Population

65 patients admitted with electrical storm

Comparison

Catheter ablation without a control group

Design

Single-center retrospective cohort study

Follow-up

Median 23 months

Key result

Catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia electrical storm resulted in VT-related ICD therapies in 33.85% of patients and a 40% mortality rate over a median 23-month follow-up.

Authors

CÇCem ÇöteliSZSamuray ZekeriyeyevCSCan Sezer

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

High VT recurrence and mortality persist after ablation for electrical storm; supports trials of adjunctive strategies in this high-risk group.

Study Design

Type

Cohort (n=65)

Multicenter

No

Structured PICO

P
Population
65 patients admitted with electrical storm, predominantly male (86.15%) with ischemic cardiomyopathy (56.92%) and a mean LVEF of 35.3% ± 13%.
I
Intervention
Catheter ablation
O
Outcome
VT-related ICD therapieshard clinical

Catheter ablation for VT electrical storm is safe and acutely effective, but this population remains at high risk for long-term mortality and VT recurrence.

Cite This Study

Çöteli et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Ventricular Tachycardia Electrical Storm (n=65). Catheter ablation was evaluated on VT-related ICD therapies. Catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia electrical storm resulted in VT-related ICD therapies in 33.85% of patients and a 40% mortality rate over a median 23-month follow-up.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a16d0b062528a85c6054203https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.70221
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share