MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411720729 · doi:10.1093/ehjopen/oeaf076

Early vs. deferred catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in patients of ischaemic substrate: systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes

2025· letter· en· W4411720729 on OpenAlexaff
Abhishek Maan, Maaz Waseem, Alex Carter, Kirtivardhan Vashishtha, Tarvinder Dhanjal, Jacob S. Koruth, E. Kevin Heist

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal Open · 2025
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCatheter ablationMeta-analysisCardiologyMedicineInternal medicineAblationVentricular tachycardiaCatheterTachycardiaSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aims Ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation has been shown to reduce the recurrence of VT episodes, but the timing of performing VT ablation (early; at the time of implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation) or (deferred: after the patient has received ICD shocks) remains controversial. The objective is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of published data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) with the aim of comparing outcome of VT ablation stratified by procedural timing. Methods and results We conducted a meta-analysis of seven landmark RCTs which included patients with ICM who were either at a high risk of VT or experienced VT/ICD shocks. The primary outcome of VT recurrence was compared according to the timing of performing VT ablation (early vs. deferred). In addition, we also compared the secondary outcome of cardiac mortality. Following a comprehensive search strategy, a total of seven RCTs were included within the final analysis. Based on a pooled analysis, early VT ablation was associated with a significant reduction in the primary outcome [pooled odds ratio (OR) of 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.55–0.95, P < 0.05] in comparison with a ‘deferred VT ablation’ strategy. The cumulative absolute risk reduction (ARR) for the primary outcome was 0.21, and number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent the outcome of VT recurrence was 4.81. Furthermore, the effect size of early VT ablation compared to a deferred VT ablation approach was more pronounced in reduction of ICD shocks in the subgroup of patients with LVEF > 30% vs. those with LVEF < 30% (pooled OR of 0.65, 95% CI of 0.54–0.79, P = 0.01). For the secondary outcomes, we observed that an earlier timing of VT ablation was also associated with both a decrease in cardiac mortality (pooled OR of 0.59, 95% CI of 0.43–0.82) and in the subsequent risk of VT storm (pooled OR of 0.63, 95% CI of 0.51–0.78) when compared with a deferred timing. The cumulative ARR for cardiac mortality was 0.07 and NNT was 15. Conclusion The findings from this pooled analysis of seven major RCTs suggest that performing early VT ablation may be beneficial in reducing recurrent VT, ICD shocks, and electrical storm and could also improve cardiac mortality. The benefit of performing early VT ablation was greater in patients with LVEF of >30% amongst this ICM cohort.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal OpenSame topicCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207