Prognostic value of non-invasive programmed ventricular stimulation after VT ablation to predict VT recurrences.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Julian Müller, Ivaylo Chakarov, Karin Nentwich, Artur Berkovitz, Sebastian Barth, Felix Ausbüttel, Christian Wächter, Heiko Lehrmann, Thomas Deneke
{"title":"Prognostic value of non-invasive programmed ventricular stimulation after VT ablation to predict VT recurrences.","authors":"Julian Müller, Ivaylo Chakarov, Karin Nentwich, Artur Berkovitz, Sebastian Barth, Felix Ausbüttel, Christian Wächter, Heiko Lehrmann, Thomas Deneke","doi":"10.1007/s10840-024-01883-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The prognostic value of (non)-invasive programmed ventricular stimulation (NIPS) to predict recurrences of ventricular tachycardia (VT) is under discussion. Optimal endpoints of VT ablation are not well defined, and optimal timepoint of NIPS is unknown. The goal of this study was to evaluate the ability of programmed ventricular stimulation at the end of the VT ablation procedure (PVS) and NIPS after VT ablation to identify patients at high risk for VT recurrence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between January 2016 and February 2022, consecutive patients with VT and structural heart disease undergoing first VT ablation and consecutive NIPS were included. In total, 138 patients were included. All patients underwent NIPS through their implanted ICDs after a median of 3 (1-5) days after ablation (at least 2 drive cycle lengths (500 and 400 ms) and up to four right ventricular extrastimuli until refractoriness). Clinical VT was defined by comparison with 12-lead electrocardiograms and stored ICD electrograms from spontaneous VT episodes. Patients were followed for a median of 37 (13-61) months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 138 patients, 104 were non-inducible (75%), 27 were inducible for non-clinical VTs (20%), and 7 for clinical VT (5%). In 107 patients (78%), concordant results of PVS and NIPS were observed. After 37 ± 20 months, the recurrence rate for any ventricular arrhythmia was 40% (normal NIPS 29% vs. inducible VT during NIPS 66%; log-rank p = 0.001) and for clinical VT was 3% (normal NIPS 1% vs. inducible VT during NIPS 9%; log-rank p = 0.045). Positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of NIPS were higher compared to PVS (PPV: 65% vs. 46% and NPV: 68% vs. 61%). NIPS revealed the highest NPV among patients with ICM and LVEF > 35%. Patients with inducible VT during NIPS had the highest VT recurrences and overall mortality. Patients with both negative PVS and NIPS had the lowest any VT recurrence rates with 32%. Early re-ablation of patients with recurrent VTs during index hospitalization was feasible but did not reveal better long-term VT-free survival.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients after VT ablation and structural heart disease, NIPS is superior to post-ablation PVS to stratify the risk of VT recurrences. The PPV and NPV of NIPS at day 3 were superior compared to PVS at the end of the procedure to predict recurrent VT, especially in patients with ICM.</p>","PeriodicalId":16202,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-024-01883-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The prognostic value of (non)-invasive programmed ventricular stimulation (NIPS) to predict recurrences of ventricular tachycardia (VT) is under discussion. Optimal endpoints of VT ablation are not well defined, and optimal timepoint of NIPS is unknown. The goal of this study was to evaluate the ability of programmed ventricular stimulation at the end of the VT ablation procedure (PVS) and NIPS after VT ablation to identify patients at high risk for VT recurrence.

Methods: Between January 2016 and February 2022, consecutive patients with VT and structural heart disease undergoing first VT ablation and consecutive NIPS were included. In total, 138 patients were included. All patients underwent NIPS through their implanted ICDs after a median of 3 (1-5) days after ablation (at least 2 drive cycle lengths (500 and 400 ms) and up to four right ventricular extrastimuli until refractoriness). Clinical VT was defined by comparison with 12-lead electrocardiograms and stored ICD electrograms from spontaneous VT episodes. Patients were followed for a median of 37 (13-61) months.

Results: Of the 138 patients, 104 were non-inducible (75%), 27 were inducible for non-clinical VTs (20%), and 7 for clinical VT (5%). In 107 patients (78%), concordant results of PVS and NIPS were observed. After 37 ± 20 months, the recurrence rate for any ventricular arrhythmia was 40% (normal NIPS 29% vs. inducible VT during NIPS 66%; log-rank p = 0.001) and for clinical VT was 3% (normal NIPS 1% vs. inducible VT during NIPS 9%; log-rank p = 0.045). Positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of NIPS were higher compared to PVS (PPV: 65% vs. 46% and NPV: 68% vs. 61%). NIPS revealed the highest NPV among patients with ICM and LVEF > 35%. Patients with inducible VT during NIPS had the highest VT recurrences and overall mortality. Patients with both negative PVS and NIPS had the lowest any VT recurrence rates with 32%. Early re-ablation of patients with recurrent VTs during index hospitalization was feasible but did not reveal better long-term VT-free survival.

Conclusions: In patients after VT ablation and structural heart disease, NIPS is superior to post-ablation PVS to stratify the risk of VT recurrences. The PPV and NPV of NIPS at day 3 were superior compared to PVS at the end of the procedure to predict recurrent VT, especially in patients with ICM.

Abstract Image

VT 消融术后非侵入性程序性心室刺激对预测 VT 复发的预后价值。
背景:无创程序化心室刺激(NIPS)对预测室性心动过速(VT)复发的预后价值正在讨论中。VT 消融的最佳终点尚未明确,而 NIPS 的最佳时间点也尚不清楚。本研究旨在评估在 VT 消融术(PVS)结束时进行程序性心室刺激和 VT 消融术后进行 NIPS 的能力,以确定 VT 复发的高风险患者:方法:2016年1月至2022年2月期间,纳入了连续接受首次VT消融术和连续NIPS的VT和结构性心脏病患者。共纳入 138 例患者。所有患者均在消融术后中位 3(1-5)天后通过植入的 ICD 进行 NIPS(至少 2 个驱动周期长度(500 毫秒和 400 毫秒)和最多 4 次右心室外刺激直至折返)。临床 VT 是通过与 12 导联心电图和存储的自发性 VT 发作的 ICD 电图进行比较来定义的。对患者的随访时间中位数为 37(13-61)个月:138 例患者中,104 例为非诱导型(75%),27 例为非临床 VT 诱导型(20%),7 例为临床 VT 诱导型(5%)。在 107 名患者(78%)中,观察到了 PVS 和 NIPS 的一致结果。37 ± 20 个月后,任何室性心律失常的复发率为 40%(正常 NIPS 29% vs. NIPS 期间可诱发 VT 66%;log-rank p = 0.001),临床 VT 的复发率为 3%(正常 NIPS 1% vs. NIPS 期间可诱发 VT 9%;log-rank p = 0.045)。与 PVS 相比,NIPS 的阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)更高(PPV:65% 对 46%,NPV:68% 对 61%)。在 ICM 和 LVEF > 35% 的患者中,NIPS 的阴性预测值最高。NIPS 期间诱发 VT 的患者 VT 复发率和总死亡率最高。同时具有阴性 PVS 和 NIPS 的患者 VT 复发率最低,仅为 32%。在指数住院期间对复发的VT患者进行早期再消融是可行的,但并不能提高无VT的长期生存率:结论:对于 VT 消融术后合并结构性心脏病的患者,NIPS 优于消融术后 PVS,可对 VT 复发风险进行分层。第 3 天的 NIPS 预测 VT 复发的 PPV 和 NPV 均优于手术结束时的 PVS,尤其是在 ICM 患者中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
320
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology is an international publication devoted to fostering research in and development of interventional techniques and therapies for the management of cardiac arrhythmias. It is designed primarily to present original research studies and scholarly scientific reviews of basic and applied science and clinical research in this field. The Journal will adopt a multidisciplinary approach to link physical, experimental, and clinical sciences as applied to the development of and practice in interventional electrophysiology. The Journal will examine techniques ranging from molecular, chemical and pharmacologic therapies to device and ablation technology. Accordingly, original research in clinical, epidemiologic and basic science arenas will be considered for publication. Applied engineering or physical science studies pertaining to interventional electrophysiology will be encouraged. The Journal is committed to providing comprehensive and detailed treatment of major interventional therapies and innovative techniques in a structured and clinically relevant manner. It is directed at clinical practitioners and investigators in the rapidly growing field of interventional electrophysiology. The editorial staff and board reflect this bias and include noted international experts in this area with a wealth of expertise in basic and clinical investigation. Peer review of all submissions, conflict of interest guidelines and periodic editorial board review of all Journal policies have been established.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信