Cardiac Arrhythmia Center, Montefiore-Einstein Center for Heart and Vascular Care, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, New York; Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute, St. David's Medical Center, Austin, Texas.
Cardiac Arrhythmia Center, Montefiore-Einstein Center for Heart and Vascular Care, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, New York.
Heart Rhythm. 2021 Jun;18(6):885-893. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2021.02.010. Epub 2021 Feb 13.
Substrate catheter ablation of scar-related ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a widely accepted therapeutic option for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM).
The purpose of this study was to investigate whether concomitant amiodarone therapy affects procedural outcomes.
A total of 134 consecutive patients (89% male; age 66 ± 10 years) with ICM undergoing catheter ablation of VT were included in the study. Patients were sorted by amiodarone therapy before ablation. In all patients, a substrate-based catheter ablation (endocardial ± epicardial) in sinus rhythm abolishing all "abnormal" electrograms within the scar was performed. The endpoint of the procedure was VT noninducibility. After the ablation procedure, all antiarrhythmic medications were discontinued. All patients had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and recurrences were analyzed through the device.
In 84 patients (63%), the ablation was performed on amiodarone; the remaining 50 patients (37%) were off amiodarone. Patients had comparable baseline characteristics. Mean scar size area was 143.6 ± 44.9 cm on amiodarone vs 139.2 ± 36.8 cm off amiodarone (P = .56). More radiofrequency time was necessary to achieve noninducibility in the off-amiodarone group compared to the on-amiodarone group (68.1 ± 20.1 minutes vs 51.5 ± 19.7 minutes; P <.001). In addition, due to persistent VT inducibility, more patients in the off-amiodarone group required epicardial ablation than in the on-amiodarone group (13/50 [26%] vs 5/84 [6%], respectively; P <.001). During mean follow-up of 23.9 ± 11.6 months, recurrence of any ventricular arrhythmias off antiarrhythmic drugs was 44% (37/84) in the on-amiodarone group vs 22% (11/50) in the off-amiodarone group (P = .013).
Albeit, VT noninducibility after substrate catheter ablation for scar related VT was achieved faster, with less radiofrequency time and less need for epicardial ablation in patients taking amiodarone, these patients had significantly higher VT recurrence at long-term follow-up when this medication was discontinued.
对于缺血性心肌病(ICM)患者,瘢痕相关室性心动过速(VT)的基质导管消融是一种广泛接受的治疗选择。
本研究旨在探讨胺碘酮治疗是否会影响手术结果。
本研究共纳入 134 例连续接受 VT 导管消融的 ICM 患者(89%为男性;年龄 66±10 岁)。根据消融前是否接受胺碘酮治疗对患者进行分组。所有患者均在窦性心律下进行基于基质的导管消融(心内膜+心外膜),消融目标是消除瘢痕内所有“异常”电图。手术终点为 VT 不能诱发。消融术后,所有抗心律失常药物均停用。所有患者均植入植入式心脏复律除颤器,并通过该设备分析复发情况。
在 84 例(63%)患者中,消融在胺碘酮治疗下进行;其余 50 例(37%)患者未使用胺碘酮。两组患者基线特征相当。胺碘酮组的平均瘢痕面积为 143.6±44.9cm,而未用胺碘酮组为 139.2±36.8cm(P=0.56)。与胺碘酮组相比,未用胺碘酮组实现非诱发性所需的射频时间更长(68.1±20.1 分钟 vs 51.5±19.7 分钟;P<.001)。此外,由于持续性 VT 可诱发,未用胺碘酮组中需要行心外膜消融的患者多于胺碘酮组(13/50[26%] vs 5/84[6%];P<.001)。在平均 23.9±11.6 个月的随访期间,停用抗心律失常药物后,胺碘酮组的任何室性心律失常复发率为 44%(37/84),而未用胺碘酮组为 22%(11/50)(P=0.013)。
尽管在接受胺碘酮治疗的患者中,基于基质的导管消融治疗瘢痕相关 VT 后实现 VT 非诱发性的速度更快,射频时间更短,心外膜消融的需求更少,但当停止使用这种药物时,这些患者的 VT 复发率在长期随访中显著更高。