A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing radiofrequency catheter ablation with medical therapy for ventricular tachycardia in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathies

Background In patients with cardiomyopathy, radiofrequency catheter ablation (CA) for ventricular tachycardia (VT) is an adjunctive and alternative treatment option to long-term anti-arrhythmic drug therapy. We sought to compare CA with medical therapy for the management of VT in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathies. Methods MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were evaluated for relevant studies. Results Eleven studies with 2126 adult patients were included (711 in CA, 1415 in medical therapy). In the randomized controlled trial (RCT) analysis, CA reduced risk of recurrent VT (risk ratio (RR) 0.79 [95% CI 0.67 to 0.93], p = 0.005), ICD shocks (RR 0.64 [95% CI 0.45 to 0.89] p = 0.008), and cardiac hospitalizations (RR 0.76 [95% CI 0.63 to 0.92] p = 0.005). There was no difference in all-cause mortality (RR 0.94, p = 0.71). In combined RCT and observational study analysis, there was a trend for reduction in all-cause mortality (RR 0.75 [95% CI 0.55 to 1.02] p = 0.07). In subgroup analysis of studies with mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 35%, CA demonstrated reduction in mortality (RR 0.71, p = 0.004), ICD shocks (RR 0.63, p = 0.03), VT recurrence (RR 0.76, p = 0.004), and cardiac hospitalizations (RR 0.75, p = 0.02). The subgroup of early CA prior to ICD shocks demonstrated reduction in ICD shocks (RR 0.57, p < 0.001) and VT recurrence (RR 0.74, p = 0.01). Conclusions CA for VT demonstrated a lower risk of VT recurrence, ICD shocks, and hospitalization in comparison to medical therapy. The subgroups of early CA and LVEF < 35% demonstrated better outcomes.