Key result
Anti-tachycardia pacing successfully terminated 91% of non-fast and 76% of fast ventricular tachycardia episodes in Japanese patients with structural heart disease.
Why the study?
The real-world efficacy of anti-tachycardia pacing in patients having multiple ventricular tachycardias with varying rates has not been fully studied.
Does anti-tachycardia pacing successfully terminate both non-fast and fast ventricular tachycardias in patients with structural heart disease?
Cohort (n=41)
Yes
Does anti-tachycardia pacing successfully terminate both non-fast and fast ventricular tachycardias in patients with structural heart disease?
Anti-tachycardia pacing programming is highly effective for terminating both fast and non-fast ventricular tachycardias, supporting its routine use across diverse tachycardia detection zones.
BACKGROUND: Anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP) delivered from an implantable device is a useful tool to terminate ventricular tachycardia (VT). But its real-world efficacy for those patients having multiple VTs with varying VT rates has not been fully studied. METHODS: Using the Nippon-storm study database, efficacy of patient-by-patient basis ATP programing for Japanese patients having both non-fast (120-187 bpm) and fast VT (≥188 bpm) was assessed. According to the useful criteria of ≥50% success termination by ATP, patients were divided into three subgroups; success ≥50% for both non-fast and fast VT (both useful), ≥50% only for non-fast VT (non-fast VT useful), or ≥50% for neither non-fast nor fast VT (neither useful). RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 28 months, ATP terminated 184 of the 203 non-fast VT episodes (91%) and 86 of the 113 fast VT episodes (76%) in all 41 patients. In the patient-by-patient analysis, efficacy of ATP was not different between non-fast and fast VT in most of the patients (36/41 = 88%); 32 patients were in the both useful and four other patients in the neither useful. Neither ischemic nor non-ischemic structural heart disease was associated with the ATP efficacy, whereas LVEF more than 37.0% and non-prescribed amiodarone were characteristics of the patients classified into the both useful. CONCLUSIONS: ATP well terminated both non-fast and fast VT occurring in individual Japanese patients with various structural heart diseases in the real-world device treatment and this finding further supports ATP programing for all device tachycardia detection zones in most patients with multiple VTs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chinushi et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Ventricular Tachycardia in Structural Heart Disease (n=41). Anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP) vs. Fast VT vs Non-fast VT episodes (within-patient) was evaluated on Termination of ventricular tachycardia episodes (non-fast vs fast) (p=0.001). Anti-tachycardia pacing successfully terminated 91% of non-fast and 76% of fast ventricular tachycardia episodes in Japanese patients with structural heart disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: