Substrate-guided ablation of haemodynamically tolerated and untolerated ventricular tachycardia in patients with structural heart disease: effect of cardiomyopathy type and acute success on long-term outcome.

AIMS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of purely substrate-guided ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation in patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NIDCM) and ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) and the impact of acute procedural success on long-term outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and forty-two patients (65 ± 12 years old, 72% male) with ICM (n = 87) and with NIDCM (n = 55) underwent substrate-guided VT ablation. The ablation approach involved eliminating all LP regions and ablating all scar border zone regions with 10 or more out of 12 pace-matching. All patients were followed with regular implantable defibrillator interrogations for mean 641 ± 301 days. Complete acute success (no inducible VT) was achieved in 60 patients with ICM (69%) and in 29 patients with NIDCM (53%) (P = 0.03). Partial success (elimination of clinical VT only) was obtained in nine patients with ICM (10%) and in four patients with NIDCM (7%) (P = 0.14). Procedural failure (clinical VT still inducible) occurred in 18 patients within the ICM group (21%) and in 22 patients of the NIDCM (40%) (P = 0.04). Overall, 51 patients presented with recurrence of ventricular arrhythmias: 23 in the group with ICM (26%) and 28 in the group with NIDCM (51%) (P = 0.03). Long-term success was related to acute procedural outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Substrate-guided ablation is an effective approach in the treatment of VT with long-term outcome directly related to acute procedural success. Success rates are significantly lower in patients with NIDCM compared with those with ICM.

Comparison of outcomes after cardioversion or atrial fibrillation ablation in patients with differing periprocedural anticoagulation regimens.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data that compare traditional vitamin K antagonist (VKA) with novel oral anticoagulant regimens in periprocedural management of cardioversion or ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). We sought to compare outcomes of use of VKA, dabigatran (DABI), and rivaroxaban (RIVA) anticoagulation around the time of intervention. METHODS: We studied consecutive patients undergoing cardioversion or ablation of AF at our centre from October 2010 to October 2013. There were 3 different anticoagulation groups: warfarin (VKA), DABI, and RIVA. Safety was assessed according to number of strokes, transient ischemic attacks (TIAs), and clinically important and not important bleeding events. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the groups. Average follow-up was 6 months (± 4 months). A total of 901 patients who underwent cardioversion were studied (VKA [n = 471], DABI [n = 288] and RIVA [n = 141]). In these patients there were no strokes seen during follow-up and 2 TIAs in the DABI group. Bleeding rates were low, with no significant difference between the 3 groups. A total of 680 patients who underwent ablation were studied (VKA [n = 319], DABI [n = 220] and RIVA [n = 171]). There were no strokes reported during follow-up and 3 TIAs: 2 in the VKA group and 1 in the DABI group not resulting in a significant difference between the groups. Bleeding rates were low, with no significant difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there was a low incidence of adverse events for all anticoagulation regimens. Warfarin, DABI, and RIVA use around the time of the procedure are safe and reasonable options for patients who undergo cardioversion or AF ablation.