Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39031021›Full record

ArticleEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2024

Acute post-procedural inducibility is a poor predictor of clinical outcomes in high-risk patients (PAINESD > 17) undergoing scar-related ventricular tachycardia ablation.

Joseph Sipko, Bryan Baranowski, Mandeep Bhargava, Thomas D Callahan, Thomas J Dresing, Koji Higuchi, Ayman A Hussein, Mohamed Kanj, Justin Lee, David O Martin and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Joseph SipkoSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0009-0008-3990-7407
Bryan BaranowskiSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Mandeep BhargavaSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Thomas D CallahanSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5281-7598
Thomas J DresingSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6711-7284
Koji HiguchiSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9218-1966
Ayman A HusseinSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8359-1525
Mohamed KanjSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0009-0002-1419-1808
Justin LeeSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2823-9243
David O MartinSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Shady NakhlaSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4495-3845
John J RickardSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Walid I SalibaSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Tyler TaigenSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1258-8118
Oussama M WazniSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Pasquale SantangeliSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0023-9666
Jakub SroubekSection of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2490-5106

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsVentricular tachycardia (VT) non-inducibility in response to programmed ventricular stimulation (PVS) is a widely used procedural endpoint for VT ablation despite inconclusive evidence with respect to clinical outcomes in high-risk patients. The aim is to determine the utility of acute post-ablation VT inducibility as a predictor of VT recurrence, mortality, or mortality equivalent in high-risk patients. METHODS AND

resultsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of high-risk patients (defined as PAINESD > 17) who underwent scar-related VT ablation at our institution between July 2010 and July 2022. Patients' response to PVS (post-procedure) was categorized into three groups: Group A, no clinical VT or VT with cycle length > 240 ms inducible; Group B, only non-clinical VT with cycle length > 240 ms induced; and Group C, all other outcomes (including cases where no PVS was performed). The combined primary endpoint included death, durable left ventricular assist device placement, and cardiac transplant (Cox analysis). Ventricular tachycardia recurrence was considered a secondary endpoint (competing risk analysis). Of the 1677 VT ablation cases, 123 cases met the inclusion criteria for analysis. During a 19-month median follow-up time (interquartile range 4-43 months), 82 (66.7%) patients experienced the composite primary endpoint. There was no difference between Groups A and C with respect to the primary [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.21 (0.94-1.57), P = 0.145] or secondary [HR = 1.18 (0.91-1.54), P = 0.210] outcomes. These findings persisted after multivariate adjustments. The size of Group B (n = 13) did not permit meaningful statistical analysis.

conclusionThe results of post-ablation PVS do not significantly correlate with long-term outcomes in high-risk (PAINESD > 17) VT ablation patients.

Indexed as

Catheter AblationCicatrixRecurrenceTachycardia, VentricularAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeAblationInducibilityProcedural endpointVentricular tachycardia

Identifiers

PMID39031021
PMCPMC11259852

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.