Why the study?
The study aimed to identify short-term and long-term predictors of recurrent ventricular arrhythmias after radiofrequency ablation performed for ventricular electrical storm.
What are the clinical and laboratory predictors of recurrent ventricular arrhythmias after radiofrequency ablation for ventricular electrical storm?
What are the clinical and laboratory predictors of recurrent ventricular arrhythmias after radiofrequency ablation for ventricular electrical storm?
Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥2.95 may serve as a predictor of ventricular tachycardia or ventricular electrical storm recurrence after radiofrequency ablation.
NLR may flag post-ablation recurrence risk; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before clinical use.
Background: Ventricular electrical storm (VES) is characterized by the occurrence of multiple episodes of sustained ventricular arrhythmias (VA) over a short period of time. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has been reported as an effective treatment in patients with ventricular tachycardia (VT). Objective: The aim of the present study was to indicate the short-term and long-term predictors of recurrent VA after RFA was performed due to VES. Methods: A retrospective, single-centre study included patients, who had undergone RFA due to VT between 2012 and 2021. In terms of the short-term (at the end of RFA) effectiveness of RFA, the following scenarios were distinguished: complete success: inability to induce any VT; partial success: absence of clinical VT; failure: inducible clinical VT. In terms of the long-term (12 months) effectiveness of RFA, the following scenarios were distinguished: effective ablation: no recurrence of any VT; partially successful ablation: VT recurrence; ineffective ablation: VES recurrence. Results: were associated with VES recurrence. NLR ≥2.95 predicted VT and/or VES recurrence with a sensitivity of 66.7% and specificity of 72.2%. Conclusion: were associated with VES relapse.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sławiński et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: