Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmia in Patients With an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks are associated with higher rates of mortality and reduced quality of life. In this study we aimed to investigate the effectiveness of catheter ablation (CA) of ventricular tachycardia in patients with an ICD.

METHODS

An electronic literature search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials that compared CA vs control. The primary outcomes were recurrence of ventricular arrhythmia (ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation) and mortality. Kaplan-Meier curves for these outcomes were digitized to obtain individual patient data, which were pooled in a 1-stage meta-analysis to determine hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Secondary outcomes included cardiac hospitalization, electrical storm, syncope, appropriate ICD therapies, appropriate ICD shocks, and inappropriate shocks. For these, study-level HRs or risk ratios were obtained and pooled in random effects meta-analyses. Subgroup analysis was performed for trials that investigated prophylactic CA (before or during ICD implantation).

RESULTS

Data on 9 studies and 1103 patients were retrieved. CA significantly reduced ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation recurrence compared with control (shared frailty HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.49-0.81; P < 0.001) but not mortality (shared frailty HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.57-1.23; P = 0.361). CA was associated with significantly lower rates of cardiac hospitalization, electrical storm, appropriate ICD therapies and shocks, but not syncope or inappropriate shocks. Subgroup analysis showed similar results for prophylactic CA except that no significant difference was observed for cardiac hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

CA is associated with reduced ventricular arrhythmia recurrence, appropriate ICD therapies/shocks, electrical storm, and cardiac hospitalization, and might be effective in preventing future morbidity. Future trials are needed to support the continued benefit of these promising results, and to investigate the optimal timing of ablation.