Long-term Outcomes of Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation in Different Types of Structural Heart Disease

Login or register to view PDF.
Abstract

Ventricular tachycardia (VT) often occurs in the setting of structural heart disease and can affect patients with ischaemic or nonischaemic cardiomyopathies. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) provide mortality benefit and are therefore indicated for secondary prevention in patients with sustained VT, but they do not reduce arrhythmia burden. ICD shocks are associated with increased morbidity and mortality, and antiarrhythmic medications are often used to prevent recurrent episodes. Catheter ablation is an effective treatment option for patients with VT in the setting of structural heart disease and, when successful, can reduce the number of ICD shocks. However, whether VT ablation results in a mortality benefit remains unclear. We aim to review the long-term outcomes in patients with different types of structural heart disease treated with VT ablation.

Disclosure
Jackson Liang and Pasquale Santangeli have no conflicts of interest to declare. David J Callans has received honoraria for consulting and/or lectures from Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic and St Jude Medical.
Correspondence
David J Callans, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 9 Founders Pavilion – Cardiology, 3400 Spruce St, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, US. E: david.callans@uphs.upenn.edu
Received date
10 June 2015
Accepted date
19 October 2015
DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.15420/aer.2015.4.3.177

Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with structural heart disease (SHD). While implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have been shown to be effective in preventing sudden death due to ventricular arrhythmias, they are not able to prevent recurrent VT episodes. Antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) have some demonstrated efficacy in preventing VT episodes, although options remain limited in patients with SHD and the degree of benefit is suboptimal. Amiodarone is the most effective AAD, but is associated with significant side-effects with long-term use, and many patients are unable to tolerate the medication.

With the advances in technology over the past two decades, catheter ablation has become an increasingly utilised adjunctive treatment modality for patients with VT. Catheter ablation has been clearly shown to be effective in decreasing the number of VT episodes, including antitachycardia pacing (ATP) therapies and shocks. While catheter ablation reduces long-term VT recurrences, it has not been shown to provide mortality benefit in patients with SHD.1 In this regard, patients still tend to be referred for ablation late in their disease course. Two prior studies have shown that early referral for ablation in patients with ischaemic and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM and NICM) is associated with improved long-term VT suppression.2,3

There have been limited data published from prospective randomised controlled trials examining the long-term outcomes of VT ablation. Most outcome studies have been single or multicentre retrospective observational experiences, and case series with limited sample sizes, so are subject to a variety of biases and confounding factors.

In this article, we will summarise the available data on long-term outcomes following VT ablation in patients with different types of SHD.

Heterogeneity of Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation Studies – Impact on Long-term Outcomes

The 2009 VT ablation guidelines have proposed standards for reporting long-term outcomes after VT ablation for clinical trials (see Table 1).4 However, the outcomes in previous smaller retrospective studies have been quite variable. The patient populations in different studies may vary significantly with regards to the number of VT episodes, haemodynamic stability of VTs, presence of back-up ICD, etc. Additionally, ablation strategies (i.e. endocardial versus endocardial/epicardial approach; mapping and ablation approaches) may differ between studies, based on investigator and institutional preferences. Substrate-based ablation approaches, which are often used in patients with haemodynamically unstable VT, may differ greatly between VT ablation centres (i.e. late potential ablation, local abnormal ventricular activity ablation, scar homogenisation, scar dechannelling, linear ablation strategies and core isolation).5–12 When VT recurs after an initial ablation procedure, repeat ablation may be necessary to achieve long-term suppression.13 While some studies report long-term outcomes following the index ablation procedure, others have referred to long-term outcomes following the last ablation procedure in patients requiring multiple procedures. Therefore, it is of utmost importantance that providers carefully review the methods of each study, particularly inclusion and exclusion criteria, prior to extrapolating results to individual patients in clinical practice.

Table 1: Proposed Standards for Reporting Long-term Outcomes after VT Ablation For Clinical Trials

Open original
Open in new tab
Open ppt

Table 2: Long-term VT Recurrence Rates after Catheter Ablation in Patients

Open original
Open in new tab
Open ppt

Ischaemic Cardiomyopathy

There have been only three major prospective randomised clinical trials examining long-term outcomes after VT ablation in patients with ICM.14–16

The first large-scale prospective randomised controlled trial examining ablation versus medical therapy in patients with ICM was the Substrate Mapping and Ablation in Sinus Rhythm to Halt Ventricular Tachycardia (SMASH-VT) study.14 This trial initially enrolled only patients with recently implanted ICDs for secondary prevention and later included those who underwent ICD implantation for primary prevention who had received an appropriate ICD therapy for a single VT or ventricular fibrillation (VF) episode. A total of 128 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to catheter ablation or medical therapy (64 in each arm). The primary endpoint was survival from any appropriate ICD therapy (ATP or shock), and secondary endpoints included freedom from inappropriate ICD shock, death and ICD storm (≥3 shocks in 24-hour period). Freedom from recurrent VT/VF resulting in appropriate ICD therapy after 2 years of follow-up was significantly higher in the ablation arm (88 versus 67 %; HR 0.35; 95 % CI 0.15–0.78; p=0.007) compared with controls.14

The second landmark trial was the Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation in Coronary Heart Disease (VTACH) study: a prospective, open, randomised control trial involving 16 centres in four European countries.15 The investigators enrolled 110 patients with haemodynamically stable VT, prior MI and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), who were randomly assigned to catheter ablation and ICD versus ICD alone. The primary endpoint was time to first VT/VF recurrence. Of the 107 patients included in the analysis (52 ablation; 55 control), median time to VT/VF recurrence in the ablation group was longer than the control group (18.6 versus 5.9 months). After 2 years, those randomised to ablation had superior VT/VF-free survival (47 versus 29 %; HR 0.61; 95 % CI 0.37–0.99; p=0.045) and were more likely to be free from cardiac hospital readmission (67 versus 45 %; HR 0.55; 95 % CI 0.30–0.99; p=0.044). Additionally, those in the ablation group on average had significantly fewer appropriate ICD shocks per patient year (mean 0.6±2.1 versus 3.4±9.2 shocks; p=0.018).15

The Catheter Ablation for VT in Patients with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (CALYPSO) trial was a small prospective randomised trial comparing a strategy of early catheter ablation versus AADs for VT in patients with ICM with ICDs who had received appropriate ICD therapies for VT.16 This multicentre pilot study enrolled a total of 27 patients (13 ablation; 14 AAD), only 17 (71 %) of whom completed 6 months of follow-up. Rates of VT recurrence in this population of patients with multiple prior appropriate ICD therapies were significantly higher than those previously reported in SMASH-VT and VTACH: 62 % had recurrent VT in the ablation arm at 6 months following the ablation procedure.16

The 2-year VT-free survival rates in SMASH-VT and VTACH were 88 % and 47 %, respectively, while the 6-month VT-free survival rate in the much smaller CALYPSO trial was significantly lower (38 %), probably due to the fact that the trial selectively enrolled higher-risk patients known to have recurrent VT requiring appropriate ICD therapies.

Prospective non-randomised studies examining patients with ICM and varying VT burden have reported a wide range of long-term VT-free survival following ablation.

In 1997, Strickberger et al. prospectively enrolled 21 patients with ICD and frequent ICD therapies (mean of 25±88 ICD therapies within 36±51 days preceding ablation). Acute abolition of the clinical VT occurred in 76 %.17 Although this study did not report overall long-term VT-free survival, they did report a decrease in frequency of ICD therapies and improvement in quality of life in those with acute ablation success over a follow-up period of 11.8±10 months.17

The Cooled RF Ablation System clinical trial (2000) was a prospective, observational trial that included 146 patients with SHD, the majority (82 %) of whom had ICM.18 All patients had ICD implanted with haemodynamically stable VT and had failed at least two AADs. Mean follow-up duration was 243±153 days. One year after ablation, the VT recurrence rate was 56 %, while the 1-year mortality rate was 25 %. Of the 122 patients with at least 2 months clinical follow-up, 81 % had >75 % reduction in VT frequency in the first 2 months after ablation. The Multicenter Thermocool VT Ablation Trial was a prospective observational trial that enrolled 231 patients with recurrent monomorphic VT in setting of ICM treated with catheter ablation.19 This study was focused on evaluating the efficacy of VT ablation in very high-risk patients, and therefore included patients with haemodynamically unstable, unmappable and multiple VTs. After 6 months, 53 % of patients were free from recurrent incessant VT or intermittent VT and the mortality rate at 1 year was 18 %.19

The EURO-VT study was a multicentre, prospective, non-randomised observational study that enrolled 63 ICM patients with multiple (>4) episodes of symptomatic VT within 6 months (or VT storm) of randomisation.20 Over mean follow-up of 12 months, 49 % had VT recurrence, although the majority (79 %) of those with VT recurrence had reduction in ICD therapies.20

Retrospective observational studies examining VT ablation for patients with ICM published have reported varying long-term rates of VT recurrence ranging from 16 to 66 %. Table 2 summarises long-term outcomes of VT ablation in patients with ICM.10,14–16,18–36

Non-ischaemic Cardiomyopathy

To date, there have been no prospective randomised trials describing outcomes following VT ablation in patients with NICM. Patients with NICM have higher rates of acute procedural failure and long-term VT recurrence following ablation compared with ICM.28,36 Unlike ICM, where the underlying substrate is relatively homogeneous, patients with NICM have heterogeneous substrates that reflect the variety of pathogenetic processes. However, the distribution of abnormal substrates in patients with non-ischaemic pathology has been shown fairly homogeneous, with a typical involvement of perivalvular regions and high prevalence of intramural and/or epicardial substrates. Table 3 summarises long-term outcomes of VT ablation in dilated NICM (DCM),6,10,37–44 and Table 4 summarises long-term outcomes of VT ablation in other forms of NICM.45–65

The Heart Center of Leipzig VT (HELP-VT) study was a prospective observational European single-centre study that enrolled 63 patients with NICM and 164 patients with ICM who were treated with VT ablation between 2008 and 2011.36 Activation mapping and ablation were performed in nearly half of patients, and substrate modification was not uniformly performed. Acute procedural success (defined as complete non-inducibility after ablation) was achieved in 66.7 % of those with NICM (versus 77.4 % in ICM; p=0.125). Long-term VT-free survival was significantly lower for NICM compared with ICM: cumulative VT-free survival after median follow-up periods of 20 and 27 months for NICM and ICM, respectively, were 23 % and 43 % (HR 1.62, 95 % CI 1.12–2.34; p=0.01). VT-free survival rates at 1 year were 40.5 % for NICM and 57 % for ICM.36

Proietti et al. recently reported their experience with a substrate-guided ablation approach in 55 NICM and 87 ICM patients.28 They showed lower rates of freedom from recurrent VT in those with NICM compared with ICM (49 % versus 74 %; p=0.03) over a follow-up period of 21.1 months. They attributed their higher rates of long-term success (compared with previous reports) to the fact that higher rates of acute procedural success might have been achieved using a substrate-based approach.28

Table 3: Long-term VT Recurrence Rates

Open original
Open in new tab
Open ppt

Table 4: Long-term VT Recurrence Rates after Catheter Ablation in Patients with NICM Different from DCM

Open original
Open in new tab
Open ppt

One large single-centre retrospective observational study, which examined 226 patients with NICM treated with VT ablation, reported 29 % rate of death or transplant at long-term follow-up (4.4±3.3 years follow-up), while the secondary composite endpoint of death, heart transplantation or hospitalisation for VT recurrence at 1 year (after the last ablation) was 31 %.66

Dilated Cardiomyopathy

Patients with DCM tend to have worse prognosis after VT ablation compared with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) and congenital heart disease (CHD).66 Retrospective studies have demonstrated VT recurrence rates ranging between 46 and 61 % during long-term follow-up (mean 11–25 months for individual studies).38

Patterns of scar in non-ischaemic DCM have been previously described. Classically, there is involvement of the base of the heart along the perivalvular region, particularly around the basolateral LV.37,67 In this group of patients, the prevalence of intramural and epicardial substrates is high. At our institution, up to 11.3 % of all NICM patients had an isolated septal substrate. Haqqani et al. reported that this particular population frequently required multiple procedures to achieve VT control. VT recurred in 32 % of patients over mean follow-up of 20 months after ablation.44 Oloriz et al. later classified 87 NICM patients treated with ablation as having either predominantly anteroseptal versus inferolateral scar based on endocardial unipolar voltage mapping.68 Patients with inferolateral scar frequently had epicardial substrate, while those with anteroseptal scar more often had intramural septal substrate. They noted a higher VT recurrence rate in those with anteroseptal scar (74 vs 25 %; p<0.001), resulting in higher redo ablation rate (59 versus 7 %; p<0.001). Anteroseptal scar was an independent predictor of VT recurrence in the multivariate analysis (HR 5.5; p<0.001).

Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy

Long-term success rates of VT ablation in patients with ARVC have historically been quite variable and highly dependent on the specific ablation approach adopted.45–48,52 Over a decade ago, Marchlinski et al. reported a long-term VT suppression rate of 89 % in 19 patients who underwent endocardial VT ablation over a mean follow-up duration of 27 months.45 They identified that in these patients, certain areas such as the perivalvular tricuspid/pulmonary valve regions and the RV free wall and septum (but not the RV apex) were more likely to harbour areas with abnormal electrograms. Verma et al. showed 1, 2, and 3-year VT recurrence rates of 23 %, 27 %, and 47 %, respectively.46 Dalal et al. later reported much worse long-term outcomes in 24 patients treated with endocardial VT ablation at 29 centres across the country between 1999 and 2006.48 In their study, they reported VT recurrence rates after a single procedure of 64 %, 75 %, and 91 % after 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. They hypothesised that the dismal long-term success was due to the fact that ARVC was an electrically progressive disease.48 Later, Riley et al. elegantly showed with serial electroanatomical voltage mapping that although the RV progressively dilates, only the minority of patients have progression of endocardial scar, suggesting that an aggressive substrate modification may be effective in long-term VT control.69

In fact, given the more extensive epicardial pathological substrate in ARVC, catheter ablation approaches using a combination of endoepicardial substrate based ablation have been recently shown to significantly improve VT-free survival at the short to mid-term followup. 49–51,70 Garcia et al. reported a series of 13 ARVC patients with VT undergoing endo-epicardial mapping and ablation.49 The authors confirmed a more extensive epicardial involvement in these patients, with a reported success rate of 77 % over a mean follow-up time of 18 months. Similar findings have been reported by Bai et al.50 in a multicentre series of 49 patients undergoing either endocardial-only ablation (n=23), or endo-epicardial ablation (n=26). After a follow-up of at least 3 years, VT-free survival achieved 52.2 % in the endocardial-only ablation group and 84.6 % in the endo-epicardial ablation group. Two other studies from different institutions across US and Europe have recently reported the same results.51,70 In conclusion, endo-epicardial ablation is significantly more effective that endocardial-only procedures in achieving VT-free survival in patients with ARVC, essentially due to the peculiar epicardial to endocardial progression of the disease.

Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

Malignant ventricular arrhythmias in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) stem from pathological myocardial fibrosis, disruption of cellular architecture and hypertrophied myocytes,71,72 which constitute the substrate for reentrant VTs. Studies evaluating the pattern of myocardial tissue scarring in HCM reported a high prevalence of mid-myocardial and epicardial fibrotic areas.73,74 Remarkably, in a small subset of patients in whom the disease evolves to the end-stage leading to aneurysm formation, a transmural scar can be detected.75,76 Until recently, the clinical experience with catheter ablation of VT was limited to patients with end-stage forms of the disease with apical aneurysms.76,77 Two recent studies have reported the feasibility and safety of VT ablation in larger series of patients with HCM also without apical aneurysms.53,54 In a multi-centre observational study, Santangeli et al. evaluated the role of VT ablation in a series of 22 patients with multiple episodes of drug-refractory VTs.53 In this study, an endo-epicardial ablation was required in 59 % of cases, and no major procedural complication was observed. After an average follow-up of 20 months, freedom from recurrent VT reached 73 %. In a subsequent study, Dukkipati et al. reported 10 patients with HCM-related monomorphic VT treated with combined endocardial and epicardial ablation.54 Epicardial scar was identified in 80 % of patients, endocardial scar in 60 % and no scar in 10 %. Five patients had stable inducible monomorphic VT and were treated with combined endocardial and epicardial ablation. Four underwent combined endocardial and epicardial ablation with a substrate-based approach based on sites of late/fractionated potentials with good pace maps. The final patient was non-inducible and had no endocardial or epicardial scar, so no ablation was performed. During mean long-term follow-up of mean 37.4±16.9 months, only three (30 %) patients had ICD shocks for recurrent VT (including the lone patient who was noninducible and had no electroanatomic scar).54

Cardiac Sarcoidosis

From a clinical standpoint, cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) may be difficult to differentiate from other forms of NICM, such as ARVC.78 However, patients with CS typically present with more-extensive LV scar and may have septal involvement (which is rare in ARVC), in addition to worse overall long-term ablation outcomes.58,79

In 2006, Koplan et al. reported a 75 % VT recurrence rate within 6 months of ablation in eight patients with CS treated with catheter ablation for incessant VT.55 Two small observational studies showed long-term VT recurrence rates of 43–44 % over median follow-up periods of 10 and 33 months after ablation.56,57 In another study of eight patients with CS, the clinical VTs were successfully abolished in five (63 %).79 While the authors did not specify the recurrence rate of those with failed ablation, only one (20 %) of the five patients with successful ablation had recurrent VT after 6 months of follow-up.79

The largest study of catheter ablation for VT in patients with CS included 21 patients, who tended to have multiple inducible VTs, which were consistent with scar-related reentry.58 Voltage mapping demonstrated confluent RV and patchy LV scarring with a predilection for the septum, anterior wall and perivalvular regions. While RV epicardial scar is usually overlaid RV endocardial scar, this was not the case with the LV. The rate of complete acute procedural success was relatively poor, and freedom from VT after 1 year after a single procedure was only 25 % (37 % after multiple procedures). Ablation was effective, however, in acutely terminating VT storm in seven (78 %) of the nine patients who were referred for incessant VT.58

Repaired Congenital Heart Disease

Compared with other aetiologies of NICM, long-term outcomes in patients with repaired CHD are quite favourable.66 Smaller reports have shown rates of VT-free survival ranging between 75 and 100 % over long-term follow-up (mean follow-up durations ranging between 16–61 months).59–62 In the largest series to date, Kapel et al. reported outcomes in 34 patients with repaired CHD (82 % with repaired Tetralogy of Fallot) treated with catheter ablation targeting anatomic isthmuses containing reentrant VT circuits.63 During long-term followup (mean 46 months), VT recurred in only 11.7 % of cases (0 % in those with complete procedural success versus 44 % in those without complete success), and one patient with poor cardiac function received an ICD shock for VF after ablation.63

Viral Myocarditis

Arrhythmias including VT often occur during the acute phase of viral myocarditis due to the presence of active inflammation. Later, the long-term sequelae of viral myocarditis including fibrosis and scar may predispose to reentrant VT. Imaging with MRI in patients with viral myocarditis has shown that different viruses tend to have different patterns of myocardial involvement.80 Due to the variability of the scar distribution, pre-procedural imaging (MRI or CT) may be helpful when performing VT ablation in these patients. Using an imaging-guided approach, Maccabelli et al. found that patients with myocarditisrelated VT very frequently have epicardial substrate.65 Long-term (median 23 months) freedom from recurrent VT after ablation in their cohort was 77 %. Dello Russo et al. subsequently studied 20 consecutive patients with biopsy-proven viral myocarditis and VT refractory to AADs referred for catheter ablation.64 During long-term follow-up (median 28 months), 90 % of the patients remained free of sustained VT and only two (10 %) patients died from non-arrhythmic cardiac causes.64

Ongoing Trials

There are multiple major ongoing trials that will further examine the long-term outcomes of VT ablation, and others which have been terminated due to difficult enrolment. Four of these ongoing trials include VT ablation versus Enhanced Drug Therapy (VANISH), the Substrate Targeted Ablation Using the FlexAbility Ablation Catheter System for the Reduction of Ventricular Tachycardia (STAR-VT) trial, PARTITA and the BERLIN study. Additionally, several ongoing studies are analysing effects of sympathetic modulation, including bilateral cardiac sympathetectomy (Cardiac Denervation Surgery for Prevention of Ventricular Tacharrhythmias [PREVENT VT])81 and renal sympathetic denervation (Renal SympathetiC Denervation to Suppress Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias [RESCUE-VT] and Renal Sympathetic Denervation as an Adjunct to Catheter-based VT Ablation [RESET-VT])82,83 as adjunct measures to prevent recurrent VT.

The VANISH trial is a prospective observational trial that is aiming to compare ablation versus aggressive AAD therapy in patients with prior MI who present with recurrent VT.84 Included patients will have prior MI with ICD in place, and must have been treated with at least one appropriate ICD therapy, and have failed at least one AAD. Goal enrolment is 260 patients, and patients will be randomised to either ablation or aggressive AAD therapy (high-dose amiodarone or addition of mexilitine). Duration of follow-up is 5 years, and primary outcome is a composite of appropriate ICD shocks, VT storm and death. Secondary outcome is all-cause mortality. The trial has finished enrolling patients and has an estimated study completion date of March 2016.

STAR-VT is an open-label, prospective randomised trial that aims to examine whether scar-based VT ablation results in superior outcomes compared with routine AAD therapy in patients with monomorphic VT in the setting of ICM or NICM.85 Goal enrolment is 1,453 patients, and inclusion criteria include implantation of a St Jude Medical ICD or cardiac resynchronisation therapy device, ≥1 documented monomorphic VT episode (either spontaneous or induced during electrophysiological study or non-invasive programmed stimulation). Patients will be randomised to either substrate-guided ablation using the FlexAbility Ablation Catheter versus routine drug therapy and followed for 1 year. The primary outcome measure will be freedom from any ICD shock (appropriate or inappropriate) for recurrent sustained VT (>30 s) in one year, and secondary outcome measures include number of cardiovascular-related hospitalisations and emergency room visits. This trial is currently enrolling patients and has an estimated study completion date of May 2021.

The third large ongoing trial is the PARTITA trial, which is a large multicentre European trial aiming to determine whether timing of VT ablation after appropriate ICD shock affects long-term prognosis.86 The estimated enrolment is 590 patients who have ICD for primary or secondary prevention. After enrolment, all patients will remain in Phase A until receiving appropriate ICD shock, at which point they enter Phase B in which they will be randomised to immediate VT ablation after appropriate shock versus waiting until VT storm. Followup duration in Phase B is 2 years, and the primary outcome measure in Phase B will be worsening heart failure hospitalisations or allcause mortality. Secondary outcome measures include cardiovascular mortality, electrical storm or VT recurrence during Phase B. This study is currently recruiting patients, and has an estimated study completion date of September 2018.

The BERLIN study is a prospective randomised controlled trial taking place in Germany, which is aiming to enrol 208 patients with prior MI and LVEF 30–50 % who have an ICD indication and documented VT.87 Patients are randomised to either early ablation (immediately following ICD implantation) versus late ablation (after third ICD shock). Primary endpoints include all-cause mortality and hospital admission secondary to cardiac causes, while the secondary endpoint is time to first ICD shock.

Complications

While catheter ablation is an effective treatment option in the management of VT, it is not without risk. A recent meta-analysis reported overall complication rates in 8–10 % of procedures.88 While the majority of complications are related to vascular access, more serious complications, such as stroke or transient ischaemic attack, pericardial effusion or cardiac tamponade and even death, may rarely occur. Furthermore, since VT ablation procedures may be prolonged and significant amounts of fluids may be given during the procedure (particularly when ablating with irrigated catheters), close monitoring of haemodynamic and fluid status is paramount. Acute periprocedural haemodynamic decompensation occurred in 11 % of patients undergoing VT ablation for scar-related VT in one series.89 As such, patients should be medically optimised prior to the ablation procedure, and prophylactic support with percutaneous LV assist devices may be beneficial to facilitate mapping and ablation in certain high-risk patients.90

Timing and Patient Selection

Since ICD shocks are associated with increased mortality and morbidity, VT ablation should be considered in all patients with SHD and recurrent VT refractory to at least one AAD. Retrospective studies have demonstrated improved VT-free survival with an early ablation approach,2,3 and several prospective clinical trials examining timing of VT ablation are currently ongoing, as described above. VT ablation has been shown to have similar safety and efficacy in elderly patients so older age alone should not be a deterrent.21 The potential risks and benefits must be considered in each particular patient prior to deciding whether to proceed with VT ablation. In all patients with VT who have an appropriate periprocedural risk and in whom VT ablation is likely to be successful, we recommend consideration of ablation early in the course of treatment, especially in those who wish to avoid or are intolerant of AADs.

Conclusions

While catheter ablation is an effective treatment option for VT suppression in patients with SHD, long-term VT suppression rates vary based on the underlying aetiology. Although prior studies have not demonstrated long-term mortality benefit, ablation is effective in reducing long-term VT recurrences, abolishing VT storm and preventing ICD shocks. The overall outcomes associated with catheter ablation are worse in patients with NICM compared with those with ischaemic substrates, which is likely the result of more complex substrates in NICM patients with a higher prevalence of intramural and/or epicardial substrates. In survivors of VT who do not yet have ICDs in place, an early ablation strategy in addition to ICD may reduce the incidence of future ICD therapies. Ongoing studies are further evaluating whether earlier catheter ablation of VT is associated with improved outcomes.

References
  1. Mallidi J, Nadkarni GN, Berger RD, et al. Meta-analysis of catheter ablation as an adjunct to medical therapy for treatment of ventricular tachycardia in patients with structural heart disease. Heart Rhythm 2011;8:503–10.
    Crossref | PubMed
  2. Frankel DS, Mountantonakis SE, Robinson MR, et al. Ventricular tachycardia ablation remains treatment of last resort in structural heart disease: argument for earlier intervention. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2011;22:1123–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  3. Dinov B, Arya A, Bertagnolli L, et al. Early referral for ablation of scar-related ventricular tachycardia is associated with improved acute and long-term outcomes: results from the Heart Center of Leipzig ventricular tachycardia registry. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2014;7:1144–51.
    Crossref | PubMed
  4. Aliot EM, Stevenson WG, Almendral-Garrote JM, et al. EHRA/ HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias: developed in a partnership with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), a Registered Branch of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), and the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS); in collaboration with the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA). Heart Rhythm 2009;6:886–933.
    Crossref | PubMed
  5. Arenal A, Glez-Torrecilla E, Ortiz M, et al. Ablation of electrograms with an isolated, delayed component as treatment of unmappable monomorphic ventricular tachycardias in patients with structural heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:81–92.
    Crossref | PubMed
  6. Vergara P, Trevisi N, Ricco A et al. Late potentials abolition as an additional technique for reduction of arrhythmia recurrence in scar related ventricular tachycardia ablation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2012;23:621–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  7. Jais P, Maury P, Khairy P, et al. Elimination of local abnormal ventricular activities: a new end point for substrate modification in patients with scar-related ventricular tachycardia. Circulation 2012;125:2184–96.
    Crossref | PubMed
  8. Di Biase L, Santangeli P, Burkhardt DJ, et al. Endo-epicardial homogenization of the scar versus limited substrate ablation for the treatment of electrical storms in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60:132–41.
    Crossref | PubMed
  9. Soejima K, Stevenson WG, Maisel WH, et al. Electrically unexcitable scar mapping based on pacing threshold for identification of the reentry circuit isthmus: feasibility for guiding ventricular tachycardia ablation. Circulation 2002;106:1678–83.
    Crossref | PubMed
  10. Marchlinski FE, Callans DJ, Gottlieb CD, Zado E. Linear ablation lesions for control of unmappable ventricular tachycardia in patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy. Circulation 2000;101:1288–96.
    Crossref | PubMed
  11. Tzou WS, Frankel DS, Hegeman T, et al. Core isolation of critical arrhythmia elements for treatment of multiple scarbased ventricular tachycardias. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2015;8:353–61.
    Crossref | PubMed
  12. Santangeli P, Marchlinski FE. Substrate mapping for unstable ventricular tachycardia. Heart Rhythm 2015; doi: 10.1016/j. hrthm.2015.09.023. epub ahead of print.
  13. Kosmidou I, Inada K, Seiler J, et al. Role of repeat procedures for catheter ablation of postinfarction ventricular tachycardia. Heart Rhythm 2011;8:1516–22.
    Crossref | PubMed
  14. Reddy VY, Reynolds MR, Neuzil P, et al. Prophylactic catheter ablation for the prevention of defibrillator therapy. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2657–65.
    Crossref | PubMed
  15. Kuck KH, Schaumann A, Eckardt L, et al. Catheter ablation of stable ventricular tachycardia before defibrillator implantation in patients with coronary heart disease (VTACH): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2010;375:31–40.
    Crossref | PubMed
  16. Al-Khatib SM, Daubert JP, Anstrom KJ, et al. Catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia in patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (CALYPSO) pilot trial. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2015;26:151–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  17. Strickberger SA, Man KC, Daoud EG, et al. A prospective evaluation of catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia as adjuvant therapy in patients with coronary artery disease and an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Circulation 1997;96:1525–31.
    Crossref | PubMed
  18. Calkins H, Epstein A, Packer D, et al. Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in patients with structural heart disease using cooled radiofrequency energy: results of a prospective multicenter study. Cooled RF Multi Center Investigators Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;35:1905–14.
    Crossref | PubMed
  19. Stevenson WG, Wilber DJ, Natale A, et al. Irrigated radiofrequency catheter ablation guided by electroanatomic mapping for recurrent ventricular tachycardia after myocardial infarction: the multicenter thermocool ventricular tachycardia ablation trial. Circulation 2008;118:2773–82.
    Crossref | PubMed
  20. Tanner H, Hindricks G, Volkmer M, et al. Catheter ablation of recurrent scar-related ventricular tachycardia using electroanatomical mapping and irrigated ablation technology: results of the prospective multicenter Euro-VT-study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2010;21:47–53.
    Crossref | PubMed
  21. Liang JJ, Khurshid S, Schaller RD, et al. Safety and efficacy of catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia in elderly patients with structural heart disease. JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology 2015;1:52–8.
    Crossref
  22. Kim YH, Sosa-Suarez G, Trouton TG, et al. Treatment of ventricular tachycardia by transcatheter radiofrequency ablation in patients with ischemic heart disease. Circulation 1994;89:1094–102.
    Crossref | PubMed
  23. Gonska BD, Cao K, Schaumann A, et al. Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in 136 patients with coronary artery disease: results and long-term follow-up. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994;24:1506–14.
    Crossref | PubMed
  24. Willems S, Borggrefe M, Shenasa M, et al. Radiofrequency catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia following implantation of an automatic cardioverter defibrillator. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1993;16:1684–92.
    Crossref | PubMed
  25. Rothman SA, Hsia HH, Cossu SF, et al. Radiofrequency catheter ablation of postinfarction ventricular tachycardia: long-term success and the significance of inducible nonclinical arrhythmias. Circulation 1997;96:3499–508.
    Crossref | PubMed
  26. Stevenson WG, Friedman PL, Kocovic D, et al. Radiofrequency catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia after myocardial infarction. Circulation 1998;98:308–14.
    Crossref | PubMed
  27. Della Bella P, De Ponti R, Uriarte JA, et al. Catheter ablation and antiarrhythmic drugs for haemodynamically tolerated post-infarction ventricular tachycardia; long-term outcome in relation to acute electrophysiological findings. Eur Heart J 2002;23:414–24.
    Crossref | PubMed
  28. Proietti R, Essebag V, Beardsall J, et al. 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. Europace 2015;17:461–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  29. Morady F, Harvey M, Kalbfleisch SJ, et al. Radiofrequency catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation 1993;87:363–72.
    Crossref | PubMed
  30. Ortiz M, Almendral J, Villacastin J, et al. [Radiofrequency ablation of ventricular tachycardia in patients with ischemic cardiopathy]. Rev Esp Cardiol 1999;52:159–68.
    Crossref | PubMed
  31. El-Shalakany A, Hadjis T, Papageorgiou P, et al. Entrainment/ mapping criteria for the prediction of termination of ventricular tachycardia by single radiofrequency lesion in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation 1999;99:2283–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  32. Borger van der Burg AE, de Groot NM, van Erven L, et al. Long-term follow-up after radiofrequency catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia: a successful approach? J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2002;13:417–23.
    Crossref | PubMed
  33. O’Donnell D, Bourke JP, Anilkumar R, et al. Radiofrequency ablation for post infarction ventricular tachycardia. Report of a single centre experience of 112 cases. Eur Heart J 2002;23:1699–705.
    Crossref | PubMed
  34. Segal OR, Chow AW, Markides V, et al. Long-term results after ablation of infarct-related ventricular tachycardia. Heart Rhythm 2005;2:474–82.
    Crossref | PubMed
  35. Verma A, Marrouche NF, Schweikert RA, et al. Relationship between successful ablation sites and the scar border zone defined by substrate mapping for ventricular tachycardia post-myocardial infarction. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2005;16:465–71.
    Crossref | PubMed
  36. Dinov B, Fiedler L, Schonbauer R, et al. Outcomes in catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in dilated nonischemic cardiomyopathy compared with ischemic cardiomyopathy: results from the Prospective Heart Centre of Leipzig VT (HELP-VT) Study. Circulation 2014;129:728–36.
    Crossref | PubMed
  37. Hsia HH, Callans DJ, Marchlinski FE. Characterization of endocardial electrophysiological substrate in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy and monomorphic ventricular tachycardia. Circulation 2003;108:704–10.
    Crossref | PubMed
  38. Soejima K, Stevenson WG, Sapp JL, et al. Endocardial and epicardial radiofrequency ablation of ventricular tachycardia associated with dilated cardiomyopathy: the importance of low-voltage scars. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:1834–42.
    Crossref | PubMed
  39. Cesario DA, Vaseghi M, Boyle NG, et al. Value of high-density endocardial and epicardial mapping for catheter ablation of hemodynamically unstable ventricular tachycardia. Heart Rhythm 2006;3:1–10.
    Crossref | PubMed
  40. Cano O, Hutchinson M, Lin D, et al. Electroanatomic substrate and ablation outcome for suspected epicardial ventricular tachycardia in left ventricular nonischemic cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54:799–808.
    Crossref | PubMed
  41. Schmidt B, Chun KR, Baensch D, et al. Catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia after failed endocardial ablation: epicardial substrate or inappropriate endocardial ablation? Heart Rhythm 2010;7:1746–52.
    Crossref | PubMed
  42. Nakahara S, Tung R, Ramirez RJ, et al. Characterization of the arrhythmogenic substrate in ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy implications for catheter ablation of hemodynamically unstable ventricular tachycardia. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:2355–65.
    Crossref | PubMed
  43. Kuhne M, Abrams G, Sarrazin JF, et al. Isolated potentials and pace-mapping as guides for ablation of ventricular tachycardia in various types of nonischemic cardiomyopathy. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2010;21:1017–23.
    Crossref | PubMed
  44. Haqqani HM, Tschabrunn CM, Tzou WS, et al. Isolated septal substrate for ventricular tachycardia in nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy: incidence, characterization, and implications. Heart Rhythm 2011;8:1169–76.
    Crossref | PubMed
  45. Marchlinski FE, Zado E, Dixit S, et al. Electroanatomic substrate and outcome of catheter ablative therapy for ventricular tachycardia in setting of right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Circulation 2004;110:2293–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  46. Verma A, Kilicaslan F, Schweikert RA, et al. Short- and longterm success of substrate-based mapping and ablation of ventricular tachycardia in arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia. Circulation 2005;111:3209–3216.
    Crossref | PubMed
  47. Yao YAN, Zhang SHU, He DS, et al. Radiofrequency ablation of the ventricular tachycardia with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy using non-contact mapping. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology 2007;30:526–33.
    Crossref | PubMed
  48. Dalal D, Jain R, Tandri H, et al. Long-term efficacy of catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:432–40.
    Crossref | PubMed
  49. Garcia FC, Bazan V, Zado ES, et al. Epicardial substrate and outcome with epicardial ablation of ventricular tachycardia in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia. Circulation 2009;120:366–75.
    Crossref | PubMed
  50. Bai R, Di Biase L, Shivkumar K, et al. Ablation of ventricular arrhythmias in arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/ cardiomyopathy: arrhythmia-free survival after endoepicardial substrate based mapping and ablation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2011;4:478–85.
    Crossref | PubMed
  51. Philips B, Madhavan S, James C, et al. Outcomes of catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2012;5:499–505.
    Crossref | PubMed
  52. Müssigbrodt A, Dinov B, Bertagnoli L, et al. Precordial QRS amplitude ratio predicts long-term outcome after catheter ablation of electrical storm due to ventricular tachycardias in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. J Electrocardiol 2015;48:86–92.
    Crossref | PubMed
  53. Santangeli P, Di Biase L, Lakkireddy D, et al. Radiofrequency catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: safety and feasibility. Heart Rhythm 2010;7:1036–42.
    Crossref | PubMed
  54. Dukkipati SR, d’Avila A, Soejima K, et al. Long-term outcomes of combined epicardial and endocardial ablation of monomorphic ventricular tachycardia related to hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2011;4:185–94.
    Crossref | PubMed
  55. Koplan BA, Soejima K, Baughman K, et al. Refractory ventricular tachycardia secondary to cardiac sarcoid: electrophysiologic characteristics, mapping, and ablation. Heart Rhythm 2006;3:924–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  56. Jefic D, Joel B, Good E, et al. Role of radiofrequency catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in cardiac sarcoidosis: Report from a multicenter registry. Heart Rhythm 2009;6:189–195.
    Crossref | PubMed
  57. Naruse Y, Sekiguchi Y, Nogami A, et al. Systematic treatment approach to ventricular tachycardia in cardiac sarcoidosis. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2014;7.:407–13.
    Crossref | PubMed
  58. Kumar S, Barbhaiya C, Nagashima K, et al. Ventricular tachycardia in cardiac sarcoidosis: characterization of ventricular substrate and outcomes of catheter ablation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2015;8:87–93.
    Crossref | PubMed
  59. Gonska BD, Cao K, Raab J, et al. Radiofrequency catheter ablation of right ventricular tachycardia late after repair of congenital heart defects. Circulation 1996;94:1902–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  60. Furushima H, Chinushi M, Sugiura H, et al. Ventricular tachycardia late after repair of congenital heart disease: efficacy of combination therapy with radiofrequency catheter ablation and class III antiarrhythmic agents and long-term outcome. J Electrocardiol 2006;39:219–224.
    Crossref | PubMed
  61. Zeppenfeld K, Schalij MJ, Bartelings MM, et al. Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia after repair of congenital heart disease: electroanatomic identification of the critical right ventricular isthmus. Circulation 2007;116:2241–52.
    Crossref | PubMed
  62. Kriebel T, Saul JP, Schneider H, et al. Noncontact mapping and radiofrequency catheter ablation of fast and hemodynamically unstable ventricular tachycardia after surgical repair of tetralogy of Fallot. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:2162–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  63. Kapel GFL, Reichlin T, Wijnmaalen AP, et al. Re-entry using anatomically determined isthmuses: A curable ventricular tachycardia in repaired congenital heart disease. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2015;8:102–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  64. Dello Russo A, Casella M, Pieroni M, et al. Drug-refractory ventricular tachycardias after myocarditis: endocardial and epicardial radiofrequency catheter ablation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2012;5:492–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  65. Maccabelli G, Tsiachris D, Silberbauer J, et al. Imaging and epicardial substrate ablation of ventricular tachycardia in patients late after myocarditis. Europace 2014;16:1363–72.
    Crossref | PubMed
  66. Tokuda M, Tedrow UB, Kojodjojo P, et al. Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in nonischemic heart disease. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2012;5:992–1000.
    Crossref | PubMed
  67. Piers SR, Tao Q, van Huls van Taxis CF, et al. Contrast-enhanced MRI-derived scar patterns and associated ventricular tachycardias in nonischemic cardiomyopathy: implications for the ablation strategy. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2013;6:875–83.
    Crossref | PubMed
  68. Oloriz T, Silberbauer J, Maccabelli G, et al. Catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmia in nonischemic cardiomyopathy: anteroseptal versus inferolateral scar sub-types. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2014;7:414–23.
    Crossref | PubMed
  69. Riley MP, Zado E, Bala R, et al. Lack of uniform progression of endocardial scar in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy and ventricular tachycardia. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2010;3:332–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  70. Berruezo A, Fernandez-Armenta J, Mont L, et al. Combined endocardial and epicardial catheter ablation in arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia incorporating scar dechanneling technique. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2012;5:111–21.
    Crossref | PubMed
  71. Tomaselli GF, Marban E. Electrophysiological remodeling in hypertrophy and heart failure. Cardiovasc Res 1999;42:270–83.
    Crossref | PubMed
  72. Wolf CM, Moskowitz IP, Arno S, et al. Somatic events modify hypertrophic cardiomyopathy pathology and link hypertrophy to arrhythmia. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:18123–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  73. Adabag AS, Maron BJ, Appelbaum E, et al. Occurrence and frequency of arrhythmias in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in relation to delayed enhancement on cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:1369–74.
    Crossref | PubMed
  74. Kwon DH, Smedira NG, Rodriguez ER, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance detection of myocardial scarring in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: correlation with histopathology and prevalence of ventricular tachycardia. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54:242–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  75. Lim KK, Maron BJ, Knight BP. Successful catheter ablation of hemodynamically unstable monomorphic ventricular tachycardia in a patient with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and apical aneurysm. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2009;20:445–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  76. Mantica M, Della Bella P, Arena V. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with apical aneurysm: a case of catheter and surgical therapy of sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia. Heart 1997;77:481–3.
    Crossref | PubMed
  77. Rodriguez LM, Smeets JL, Timmermans C, et al. Radiofrequency catheter ablation of sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1997;8:803–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  78. Corrado D, Thiene G. Cardiac sarcoidosis mimicking arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia: the renaissance of endomyocardial biopsy? J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2009;20:477–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  79. Dechering DG, Kochhäuser S, Wasmer K, et al. Electrophysiological characteristics of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in cardiac sarcoidosis versus arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Heart Rhythm 2013;10:158–164.
    Crossref | PubMed
  80. Mahrholdt H, Wagner A, Deluigi CC, et al. Presentation, patterns of myocardial damage, and clinical course of viral myocarditis. Circulation 2006;114:1581–90.
    Crossref | PubMed
  81. Cardiac Denervation Surgery for Prevention of Ventricular Tacharrhythmias (PREVENT VT). Available at: https://www. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01013714 (accessed 1 November 2015).
  82. REnal SympathetiC Denervation to sUpprEss Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias (RESCUE-VT). Available at: https://www. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01747837 (accessed 1 November 2015).
  83. REnal Sympathetic dEnervaTion as an a Adjunct to Catheterbased VT Ablation (RESET-VT). Available at: https://www. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01858194 (accessed 1 November 2015).
  84. Ventricular Tachycardia (VT) Ablation Versus Enhanced Drug Therapy (VANISH). Available at: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ ct2/show/NCT00905853 (accessed 1 November 2015).
  85. Substrate Targeted Ablation Using the FlexAbility™ Ablation Catheter System for the Reduction of Ventricular Tachycardia (STAR-VT). Available at: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/ show/NCT02130765 (accessed 1 November 2015).
  86. Does Timing of VT Ablation Affect Prognosis in Patients With an Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator? (PARTITA). Available at: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01547208 (accessed 1 November 2015).
  87. Insights into BERLIN study of catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia treatment. Cardiac Rhythm News. Available at: http://www.cxvascular.com/crn-latest-news/cardiac-rhythmnews--- latest-news/insights-into-berlin-study-of-catheterablation- for-ventricular-tachycardia-treatment- (accessed 1 November 2015).
  88. Pothineni NV, Deshmukh A, Padmanabhan D, et al. Complication rates of ventricular tachycardia ablation: Comparison of safety outcomes derived from administrative databases and clinical trials. Int J Cardiol 2015;201:529–31.
    Crossref | PubMed
  89. Santangeli P, Muser D, Zado ES, et al. Acute hemodynamic decompensation during catheter ablation of scar-related ventricular tachycardia: incidence, predictors, and impact on mortality. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2015;8:68–75.
    Crossref | PubMed
  90. Reddy YM, Chinitz L, Mansour M, et al. Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in ventricular tachycardia ablation: multicenter experience. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2014;7:244–50.
    Crossref | PubMed
  91. Santangeli P, Di Biase L, Al-Ahmad A, et al. Primary ablation for Ventricular Tachycardia: When and How? Cardiac Electrophysiology Clinics 2014;3:675–688.
    Crossref