Key result
Pace mapping-guided catheter ablation for low-burden idiopathic outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias resulted in comparable 6-month VA-free survival to standard ablation (77% vs 71%, P=0.77).
Why the study?
Data were limited comparing ablation outcomes in patients with low intraprocedural burden of ventricular arrhythmias undergoing pace mapping guidance versus high-burden cases guided by standard activation mapping.
Does pace mapping-guided catheter ablation result in comparable outcomes to standard activation mapping in patients with idiopathic outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias?
Comparison
Pace mapping-guided ablation (low intraprocedural burden) vs standard activation mapping (high burden)
Design
Comparative cohort study
Follow-up
6-month
Authors
Loading...
May support pace mapping in low-burden idiopathic OT VA; leaves open randomized confirmation of equivalence.
Cohort (n=66)
Does pace mapping-guided catheter ablation result in comparable outcomes to standard activation mapping in patients with idiopathic outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias?
Absolute Event Rate: 77% vs 71%
p-value: p=.77
Pace mapping-guided catheter ablation is an effective strategy for idiopathic outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias in patients with low intraprocedural burden, yielding outcomes comparable to standard activation mapping in high-burden patients.
Bennett et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Idiopathic outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias (n=66). Pace mapping (PM)-guided catheter ablation vs. Standard activation mapping strategy (non-PM) was evaluated on VA-free survival at 6-month follow-up (p=.77). Pace mapping-guided catheter ablation for low-burden idiopathic outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias resulted in comparable 6-month VA-free survival to standard ablation (77% vs 71%, P=0.77).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: