UNASSIGNED: We searched the databases of Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library through October 17, 2019 for studies describing the clinical outcomes of VT ablation in ARVC. Data including VT recurrence, all-cause mortality, acute procedural efficacy and major procedural complications were extracted. A meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis was further performed in comparative studies of endo-epicardial versus endocardial-only ablation.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 24 studies with 717 participants were enrolled. The literatures of epicardial ablation were mainly published after 2010 with total ICD implantation of 73.7%, acute efficacy of 89.8%, major complication of 5.2%, follow-up of 28.9 months, VT freedom of 75.3%, all-cause mortality of 1.1% and heart transplantation of 0.6%. Meta-analysis of 10 comparative studies revealed that compared with endocardial-only approach, epicardial ablation significantly decreased VT recurrence (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.30-0.85; P = 0.010), but somehow increased major procedural complications (OR: 4.64; 95% CI: 1.28-16.92; P= 0.02), with not evident improvement of acute efficacy (OR: 2.74; 95% CI: 0.98-7.65; P = 0.051) or all-cause mortality (OR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.09-8.31; P = 0.90).
UNASSIGNED: Catheter ablation for VT in ARVC is feasible and effective. Epicardial ablation is associated with better long-term VT freedom, but with more major complications and unremarkable survival or acute efficacy benefit.