Point-by-point versus multisite electrode mapping in VT ablation: does freedom from VT recurrences depend on mapping catheter? An observational study.

PURPOSE

This study was conducted with the purpose of determining whether or not the potential technical advantages of multi-electrode mapping catheters in catheter ablation (CA) of ventricular tachycardia (VT) result in any relevant clinical benefit for VT patients.

METHODS

A single-center VT study, having taken place from 2012 to 2014 using a standard 3.5-mm catheter (Thermocool SF® group 1) and from 2014 to 2016 using a 1-mm multi-electrode-mapping catheter (PentaRay® group 2), was conducted. The endpoint was the complete elimination of late potentials (LPs), local abnormal ventricular activities (LAVA), and VT non-inducibility. Follow-up consisted of device interrogation to monitor for VT recurrence.

RESULTS

Out of 74 VT patients aged 64.5 ± 12.0 years (66 male [89.2%], 56 with ICM [75.7%], and 18 with NICM [24.3%)]), 48 patients (64.9%) were investigated in group 1 and 26 (35.1%) in group 2. Using the multi-point acquisition approach, a tendency to require less mapping time (group 1 65.2 ± 37.6 min, group 2 55.6 ± 34.4 min, p ns) was determined. During 12-month follow-up, 57 patients had freedom from VT recurrences (79.2%). The result was insignificant between the groups (38 patients (79.2%) in group 1 and 19 patients (73.1%) in group 2).

CONCLUSIONS

In a single-center observational study, both conventional and high-density mapping approaches in VT patients are comparable in terms of procedure duration and outcome. Mapping time when using a multi-electrode catheter seems to have the tendency of being shorter. We should be encouraged to recruit more patients comparing the benefit of different catheter types.