Why the study?
Does the presence of supraventricular tachycardia predict VT recurrence after catheter ablation in patients with ARVD/C?
Does the presence of supraventricular tachycardia predict VT recurrence after catheter ablation in patients with ARVD/C?
In patients with ARVD/C, the presence of supraventricular tachycardia and older age are significant predictors of ventricular tachycardia recurrence following catheter ablation.
Suggests closer monitoring may be warranted for post-ablation ARVD/C patients with concurrent SV.
Aims: This study aimed to assess the impact of supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) on long-term results of radiofrequency catheter ablation therapy of ventricular tachycardia (VT) in a large cohort of patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy (ARVD/C). Methods and results: Supraventricular tachycardia occurrence has been studied in patients from our ARVD/C registry (70 patients, 48 male, age 53.2 ± 14.0, 45 patients (64.3%) with previous VT ablation). SVT were diagnosed in 26 of 70 patients (37.1%). Atrial fibrillation (AF) was the most frequent atrial arrhythmia, diagnosed in 17 patients (24.3%). In univariate analysis advanced age, clinical symptoms of heart failure, enlarged right atrium, diagnosis of significant tricuspid regurgitation (TR), and inappropriate implantable cardioverters-defibrillators therapy were associated with SVT. In binary logistic regression analysis only heart failure: hazard ratio (HR) 10.89, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.08-109.96 (P = 0.043) and significant TR: HR 4.79, 95% CI 1.35-16.33 (P = 0.015) remained associated with SVT. In patients with previous VT ablation Cox multiple regression survival analysis revealed older age (≥53 years): HR 4.63, 95% CI 1.51-14.24 (P = 0.008) and SVT: HR 3.01, 95% CI 1.15-7.89 (P = 0.025) as predictors for VT recurrence during the follow-up. Conclusion: SVT and older age are associated with the recurrence of VT after catheter ablation in patients with ARVD/C.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Müssigbrodt et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: