Comparison of the arrhythmogenic substrate for ventricular tachycardia in patients with ischemic vs non-ischemic cardiomyopathy - insights from high-density, multi-electrode catheter mapping.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the differences of arrhythmogenic substrate using high-density mapping in ventricular tachycardia (VT) patients with ischemic (ICM) vs non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM).

METHODS

Data from patients presenting for VT ablation from December 2016 to December 2020 at Westmead Hospital were reviewed.

RESULTS

Sixty consecutive patients with structural heart disease (ICM 57%, NICM 43%, mean age 66 years) having catheter ablation of scar-related VT with pre-dominant left ventricular involvement were included. ICM was associated with larger proportion of dense scar area (bipolar; 19 [12-29]% vs 6 [3-10]%, P < 0.001, unipolar; 20 [12-32]% vs 11 [7-19]%, P = 0.01) compared with NICM. However, the scar ratio (unipolar dense scar [%]/bipolar dense scar [%]) was significantly higher in NICM patients (1.2 [0.8-1.7] vs 1.7 [1.3-2.3], P = 0.003). Larger scar area in ICM was paralleled by higher proportion of complex electrograms (6 [2-13] % vs 3 [1-5] %, P = 0.01), longer and wider voltage based conducting channels, higher incidence of late potential-based conducting channels, longer VT cycle-length (399 ± 80 ms vs 359 ± 68 ms, P = 0.04) and greater maximal stimulation-QRS interval among sites with good pace-map correlation (75 [51-99]ms vs 48 [31-73]ms, P = 0.02). Ventricular arrhythmia (VA) storm was more highly prevalent in ICM than NICM (50% vs 23%, P = 0.03). During the follow-up period, NICM had a significantly higher cumulative incidence for the VA recurrence than ICM (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

High-density multi-electrode catheter mapping of left ventricular arrhythmogenic substrate of NICM tends to show smaller dense scar area and higher scar ratio, compared with ICM, suggestive the extent of epicardial/intramural substrate, with paucity of substrate targets for ablation, which results in the worse outcomes with ablation.