Key result
Encircling endocardial cryoablation for ischemic ventricular tachycardia resulted in similar long-term survival (mean 5 years) regardless of whether intraoperative mapping was performed.
Why the study?
Does surgical ablation without intraoperative mapping yield similar outcomes to ablation with intraoperative mapping in patients with refractory VT?
Cohort (n=33)
Does surgical ablation without intraoperative mapping yield similar outcomes to ablation with intraoperative mapping in patients with refractory VT?
Intraoperative mapping is not crucial to the success of encircling endocardial cryoablation for ventricular tachycardia in selected patients with a well-defined anatomic scar.
May support omitting mapping in selected ischemic VT cases; leaves open randomized confirmation.
Surgical ablation of ventricular tachycardia is generally guided by the results of pre‐ and intraoperative cardiac mapping. However, in certain situations intraoperative cardiac mapping may not be possible and, therefore, surgery has to be based on information obtained preoperatively. This raises the question whether intraoperative mapping is necessary for the success of this approach. We describe our experience with encircling endocar‐dial cryoablation for ischemic VT and examine the contribution of intraoperative mapping for this procedure. Thirty‐three patients with inducibie VT refractory to medical therapy and a well defined anatomic scar were considered for surgery. All patients underwent baseline electrophysiology study and intraoperative mapping was attempted during normothermic cardiopulmonary bypass. In 14 patients, VT was inducibie intraoperatively (Group 1) and surgical ablation was guided by this information, whereasin 19patients, VT could not be mapped for various reasons (Group 2). Reasons for failure to obtain intraoperative map included noninducibility (3), nonsustained VT (8), polymorphic VT (4), VF (3), and incessant VT with hemodynamic collapse and cardiac arrest (1). The two groups did not differ with respect to age, location of myocardial infarction, or preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction. The operative procedures were similarin the twogroups with respect to aortic cross clamp time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, number of cryoablation lesions, concomitant revascularization, aneurysmectomy, and ICD implantation. Encircling endocardial cryoablation was performed in 32 patients and one patient underwent partial right ventricular free wall disconnection (RV infarct). Thirteen patients underwent concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (5 in Group 1 and 8 in group 2). One patient had prophylactic ICD patches (Group 1). The mean LVEF pre‐ and postoperatively were similar in the two groups. One patient died postoperatively. Three patients had recurrent VT perioperatively: one patient was treated with amiodarone and two had an ICD implantation. During long‐term follow‐up (mean 5 years), survival was similar in the two groups. Conclusions: Encircling endocardial cryoablation for ventricular tachycardia is a useful surgical technique in selected patients. Preoperative cardiac mapping is useful in defining a surgical plan, but intraoperative mapping is not crucial to the success of encircling endocardial cryoablation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thakur et al. (1994) conducted a cohort in Ischemic ventricular tachycardia (n=33). Encircling endocardial cryoablation without intraoperative mapping vs. Encircling endocardial cryoablation with intraoperative mapping was evaluated on Long-term survival. Encircling endocardial cryoablation for ischemic ventricular tachycardia resulted in similar long-term survival (mean 5 years) regardless of whether intraoperative mapping was performed.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: