Radiofrequency catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in ischemic heart disease in light of current practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology, ISSN: 1572-8595, Vol: 59, Issue: 3, Page: 603-616
2020
- 11Citations
- 29Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations11
- Citation Indexes11
- 11
- CrossRef3
- Captures29
- Readers29
- 29
Review Description
Purpose: Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a frequent cause of mortality and morbidity in patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD). We aim to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RCA) of VT in patients with IHD and to discuss its appropriate timing and limitations. Methods: Literature searches of MEDLINE, CENTRAL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Health Technology Assessment, and PsycINFO were performed in February 2020. RCTs comparing RCA vs conventional management for VT in patients with IHD and previous or planned implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) were identified. Clinical outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, cardiovascular hospitalization, VT storm, recurrent VT/ventricular fibrillation (VF), appropriate ICD therapies, and appropriate ICD shocks. Using a random-effects model, relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each outcome. Results: A total of 6 RCTs (N = 791) met inclusion criteria. RCA was associated with significantly lower VT storm (RR 0.70; CI 0.51 to 0.94, p = 0.02) and appropriate ICD therapies (RR 0.69; CI 0.54 to 0.88, p = 0.003), including appropriate ICD shocks (RR 0.66; CI 0.47 to 0.92, p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in all-cause or cardiovascular mortality, cardiovascular hospitalization, and recurrent VT/VF. Conclusions: Radiofrequency catheter ablation for VT in patients with IHD was associated with a reduced risk of VT storm, ICD therapies, and ICD shocks. There is a need for future carefully designed RCTs that incorporate improved RCA procedural aspects.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85091172742&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10840-020-00870-3; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32948937; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10840-020-00870-3; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10840-020-00870-3; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10840-020-00870-3
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know