Non-invasive stereotactic body radiation therapy for refractory ventricular arrhythmias: an institutional experience.

BACKGROUND: Initial studies have reported excellent safety and efficacy for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in patients with refractory ventricular tachycardia (VT). METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective analysis of eight consecutive patients who underwent SBRT for refractory, scar-related VT. The anatomic target for radioablation was defined based on surface 12-lead ECG VT morphology, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and electroanatomic mapping data when available. The target volume treated and the prescribed radiation dose (15-25 Gy) was based on the combined clinical assessment of the cardiac electrophysiologist and radiation oncologist. Ventricular arrhythmias, radiation-related outcomes, and adverse events were monitored at follow-up. RESULTS: Eight patients underwent nine SBRT sessions. All patients were male with an average age of 75 ± 7.3 years and mean ejection fraction of 21 ± 7%. SBRT was performed with delivery of an average of 22.2 ± 3.6 Gy in a single session with a procedure time of 18.2 ± 6.0 min. All but one session was performed on an inpatient basis. No acute complications occurred. During a median follow-up of 7.8 months (IQR 4.8, 9.9), ICD therapies decreased from median 69.5 (43.5, 115.8) pre-SBRT to 13.3 (IQR 7.7, 35.8) post-SBRT (p = 0.036). There were three patient deaths in the follow-up period, unrelated to SBRT. Apparent clinical benefit occurred 33% of the time after SBRT. CONCLUSIONS: The patients experienced overall reduction in VT burden following SBRT, though not with the immediate effect seen in other patient series. Further studies (basic, translational, and clinical) are essential to determine the benefit of SBRT and if so, the optimal protocols and patient selection.

Characterization of the arrhythmogenic substrate in ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy implications for catheter ablation of hemodynamically unstable ventricular tachycardia.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the characteristics and prevalence of late potentials (LP) in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) and ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) etiologies and evaluate their value as targets for catheter ablation. BACKGROUND: LP are frequently found in post-myocardial infarction scars and are useful ablation targets. The relative prevalence and characteristics of LP in patients with NICM is not well understood. METHODS: Thirty-three patients with structural heart disease (NICM, n = 16; ICM, n = 17) referred for catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia were studied. Electroanatomic mapping was performed endocardially (n = 33) and epicardially (n = 19). The LP were defined as low voltage electrograms (<1.5 mV) with onset after the QRS interval. Very late potentials (vLP) were defined as electrograms with onset >100 ms after the QRS. RESULTS: We sampled an average of 564 +/- 449 points and 726 +/- 483 points in the left ventricle endocardium and epicardium, respectively. Mean total low voltage area in patients with ICM was 101 +/- 55 cm(2) and 56 +/- 33 cm(2), endocardial and epicardial, respectively, compared with NICM of 55 +/- 41 cm(2) and 53 +/- 28 cm(2), respectively. Within the total low voltage area, vLP were observed more frequently in ICM than in NICM in endocardium (4.1% vs. 1.3%; p = 0.0003) and epicardium (4.3% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.035). An LP-targeted ablation strategy was effective in ICM patients (82% nonrecurrence at 12 +/- 10 months of follow-up), whereas NICM patients had less favorable outcomes (50% at 15 +/- 13 months of follow-up). CONCLUSIONS: The contribution of scar to the electrophysiological abnormalities targeted for ablation of unstable ventricular tachycardia differs between ICM and NICM. An approach incorporating LP ablation and pace-mapping had limited success in patients with NICM compared with ICM, and alternative ablation strategies should be considered.