Long-term outcome of surgical cryoablation for refractory ventricular tachycardia in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy.

Aims: Limited data exist on the long-term outcome of patients (pts) with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) and ventricular tachycardia (VT) refractory to conventional therapies undergoing surgical ablation (SA). We aimed to investigate the long-term survival and VT recurrence in NICM pts with VT refractory to radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) who underwent SA. Methods and results: Consecutive pts with NICM and VT refractory to RFCA who underwent SA were included. VT substrate was characterized in the electrophysiology lab and targeted by RFCA. During SA, previous RFCA lesions/scars were identified and targeted with cryoablation (CA; 3 min/lesion; target -150 °C). Follow-up comprised office visits, ICD interrogations and the social security death index. Twenty consecutive patients with NICM who underwent SA (age 53 ± 16 years, 18 males, LVEF 41 ± 20%; dilated CM = 9, arrhythmogenic right ventricular CM = 3, hypertrophic CM = 2, valvular CM = 4, and mixed CM = 2) were studied. Percutaneous mapping/ablation in the electrophysiology lab was performed in 18 and 2 pts had primary SA. During surgery, 4.9 ± 4.0 CA lesions/pt were delivered to the endocardium (2) and epicardium (11) or both (7). VT-free survival was 72.5% at 1 year and over 43 ± 31 months (mos) (range 1-83mos), there was only one arrhythmia-related death. There was a significant reduction in ICD shocks in the 3-mos preceding SA vs. the entire follow-up period (6.6 ± 4.9 vs. 2.3 ± 4.3 shocks/pt, P = 0.001). Conclusion: In select pts with NICM and VT refractory to RFCA, SA guided by pre-operative electrophysiological mapping and ablation may be a therapeutic option.

Cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: results of the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) trial (Cohort A).

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) for patients with severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk. BACKGROUND: TAVR is an alternative to AVR for patients with severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk. METHODS: We performed a formal economic analysis based on cost, quality of life, and survival data collected in the PARTNER A (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) trial in which patients with severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk were randomized to TAVR or AVR. Cumulative 12-month costs (assessed from a U.S. societal perspective) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were compared separately for the transfemoral (TF) and transapical (TA) cohorts. RESULTS: Although 12-month costs and QALYs were similar for TAVR and AVR in the overall population, there were important differences when results were stratified by access site. In the TF cohort, total 12-month costs were slightly lower with TAVR and QALYs were slightly higher such that TF-TAVR was economically dominant compared with AVR in the base case and economically attractive (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$50,000/QALY) in 70.9% of bootstrap replicates. In the TA cohort, 12-month costs remained substantially higher with TAVR, whereas QALYs tended to be lower such that TA-TAVR was economically dominated by AVR in the base case and economically attractive in only 7.1% of replicates. CONCLUSIONS: In the PARTNER trial, TAVR was an economically attractive strategy compared with AVR for patients suitable for TF access. Future studies are necessary to determine whether improved experience and outcomes with TA-TAVR can improve its cost-effectiveness relative to AVR.