Key result
Coronary venous ethanol ablation linked to ~63% lower arrhythmia recurrence vs. optimized radiofrequency.
Why the study?
Radiofrequency ablation of left ventricular summit arrhythmias is challenging and may fail due to anatomical inaccessibility, and coronary venous ethanol ablation has been suggested as an alternative strategy.
Does coronary venous ethanol ablation with or without adjunctive RF reduce arrhythmia recurrence compared to optimized RF in patients with left ventricular summit arrhythmias?
Cohort (n=82)
Does coronary venous ethanol ablation with or without adjunctive RF reduce arrhythmia recurrence compared to optimized RF in patients with left ventricular summit arrhythmias?
Absolute Event Rate: 20% vs 54%
p-value: p=0.002
Coronary venous ethanol ablation with or without adjunctive RF significantly reduces arrhythmia recurrence compared to optimized RF in patients with left ventricular summit arrhythmias.
May support coronary venous ethanol ablation in left ventricular summit arrhythmias; leaves open randomized confirmation.
BACKGROUND: Radiofrequency (RF) ablation of left ventricular summit arrhythmias (LVSAs) is challenging and may fail due to the anatomical inaccessibility of the substrate. Coronary venous ethanol ablation (CVEA) has been suggested as an alternative ablation strategy for drug- and RF-refractory LVSA. OBJECTIVE: This study compared venous ethanol with or without adjunctive RF (CVEA ± RF) vs optimized RF (ORF) for primary or repeat ablation of LVSA. METHODS: After propensity score matching, 41 of 43 patients treated with CVEA ± RF were compared to 41 of 93 patients who underwent ORF ablation. RESULTS: Patient characteristics were similar for both groups (77% male, median age 65 [56-71] years, median 2 [1-2] previous ablation procedures). The mean pace-match was 97.1 ± 1.7% for venous vs 94.7 ± 3% for conventional mapping (P < .0001). The earliest presystolic signal was -41 ± 11 ms for venous vs -28 ± 10 ms conventional mapping (P < .0001). Acute procedural success was 95% vs 83% for CVEA ± RF and ORF respectively (P = .077). Ventricular premature beat burden decreased by 58% after ORF and by 91% following CVEA ± RF (P = .041). In patients with ventricular tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia burden decreased by 96% after CVEA ± RF (P < .0001), while a 70% reduction was not significant for ORF. After a median follow-up of 24 (12-58) months, 20% of CVEA ± RF patients recurred as compared to 54% following ORF (P = .002). Following ORF ablation, 1 patient developed pericarditis, 1 patient tamponade, and 1 patient atrioventricular block. In the CVEA ± RF group, one patient suffered a vascular access complication. No patients died. CONCLUSION: When venous mapping supports intramural origin, RF-aided venous ethanol ablation is an effective strategy for the treatment of LVSA also when compared to ORF ablation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Smet et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Left ventricular summit arrhythmias (n=82). Coronary venous ethanol ablation with or without adjunctive radiofrequency (CVEA ± RF) vs. Optimized radiofrequency (ORF) ablation was evaluated on Arrhythmia recurrence (p=0.002). Coronary venous ethanol ablation with or without adjunctive radiofrequency significantly reduced arrhythmia recurrence compared to optimized radiofrequency (20% vs 54%; P=0.002).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: