Real‐world outcomes of ventricular tachycardia catheter ablation with versus without intracardiac echocardiography. (27th December 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Field, Michael E.; Gold, Michael R.; Reynolds, Matthew R.; Goldstein, Laura; Lee, Stephanie Hsiao Yu; Kalsekar, Iftekhar; Coplan, Paul; Wong, Charlene; Khanna, Rahul; Winterfield, Jeffrey R.
• Is Part Of: Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology. Volume 31:Number 2(2020)
• Page Start: 417
• Page End: 422
• Publication Date: 2019-12-27
• Subjects: catheter ablation -- claims database -- intracardiac echocardiography -- ventricular tachycardia; Blood vessels -- Physiology -- Periodicals; Electrophysiology -- Periodicals; Heart -- Physiology -- Periodicals; 612.1
• DOI: 10.1111/jce.14324
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1045-3873

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: By providing real‐time monitoring of catheter‐tissue interface and for complications, intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) during catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia (VT) may improve outcomes. To test this hypothesis, we compared 12‐month readmission rates (all‐cause, cardiovascular [CV]‐related, and VT‐related), repeat ablation, and complications among patients with VT with structural heart disease undergoing ablation with versus without ICE. Methods and results: Using the 2008‐2017 IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases, patients with a history of implantable cardioverter defibrillator/cardiac resynchronization therapy (ICD/CRT‐D) who underwent VT ablation with and without ICE use were identified. Propensity matching was performed and regression analysis was used to compare outcomes. After matching, 1324 patients were identified (ICE: 662; non‐ICE: 662). The rate of 12‐month VT‐related readmission (18.13% vs 22.51%; P < .05) and repeat VT ablation (14.35% vs 19.34%; P = .02) postindex discharge were lower among patients in the ICE group compared with the non‐ICE group, with a 24% lower risk of 12‐month VT‐related readmission (odds ratio [OR], 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58‐0.99) and a 30% lower risk of repeat ablation (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52‐0.93) vs non‐ICE group. The 12‐month all‐cause (44.56% vs 43.20%; P = .62) and CV‐related readmissions (35.20% vs 32.93%; P = 0.38) and complication rates were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusions: VT ablation using ICE was associated with a lower likelihood of 12‐month VT‐related readmission and repeat ablation compared with non‐ICE patients.