Antiarrhythmics or Ablation for Ventricular Tachycardia 2
Purpose
A multicenter, randomized clinical trial to assess whether catheter ablation or antiarrhythmic drug therapy provides the most effective control of important clinical outcomes for patients with prior myocardial infarction and sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT).
Condition
- Ventricular Tachycardia (VT)
Eligibility
- Eligible Ages
- Over 18 Years
- Eligible Genders
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- No
Inclusion Criteria
- Prior Myocardial Infarction and - One of the following VT events while not being treated with amiodarone, sotalol, or another class I or class III antiarrhythmic drug) within the last 6 months: - Sustained monomorphic VT documented on 12-lead ECG or rhythm strip terminated by pharmacologic means or DC cardioversion - ≥3 episodes of VT treated with antitachycardia pacing (ATP), at least one of which was symptomatic - ≥ 5 episodes of VT treated with antitachycardia pacing (ATP) regardless of symptoms - ≥1 appropriate ICD shocks, - ≥3 VT episodes within 24 hours
Exclusion Criteria
- Unable or unwilling to provide informed consent. - Active ischemia (acute thrombus diagnosed by coronary angiography, or dynamic ST segment changes demonstrated on ECG) or another reversible cause of VT (e.g. drug-induced arrhythmia), had recent acute coronary syndrome within 30 days, coronary revascularization (<90 days bypass surgery, <30 days percutaneous coronary intervention), or have CCS functional class IV angina. Note that biomarker level elevation alone after ventricular arrhythmias does not denote acute coronary syndrome or active ischemia. - Are ineligible to take the antiarrhythmic drug to which they would be assigned due to allergy, intolerance or contraindication - Are known to have protruding left ventricular thrombus or mechanical aortic and mitral valves - Have had a prior catheter ablation procedure for VT - Presenting arrhythmia: polymorphic VT or ventricular fibrillation (VF) - Are in renal failure (Creatinine clearance <15 mL/min), have NYHA Functional class IV heart failure, or a systemic illness likely to limit survival to <1 year - Have had recent ST elevation myocardial infarction or non-ST elevation MI (< 30 days); note that biomarker elevation alone after ventricular arrhythmias does not denote MI. - Are pregnant.
Study Design
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Parallel Assignment
- Primary Purpose
- Treatment
- Masking
- None (Open Label)
Arm Groups
| Arm | Description | Assigned Intervention |
|---|---|---|
|
Active Comparator VT catheter ablation |
Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia |
|
|
Active Comparator Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy |
Patients will be prescribed either oral amiodarone or sotalol daily (dosage and frequency to be determined based on patient's clinical presentation at the time of the qualifying arrhythmia). |
|
More Details
- Status
- Active, not recruiting
- Sponsor
- John Sapp
Study Contact
Detailed Description
Implantable Defibrillators (ICDs) reduce sudden death and can terminate some VT without shocks, but they don't prevent VT; the most appropriate strategy to suppress VT remains unknown. Two randomized clinical trials have suggested that catheter ablation can significantly reduce the incidence of subsequent VT in patients after an initial episode. Neither trial, however, compared catheter ablation to active antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Randomized trials of antiarrhythmic drug therapy have demonstrated that therapy with either sotalol or amiodarone can reduce recurrent VT. Both antiarrhythmic drug and ablation therapy suffer from imperfect efficacy and the potential for significant side-effects. No study has compared ablation to drug therapy for first-line treatment. The VANISH study which compared ablation to aggressive antiarrhythmic drug therapy for patients who have failed initial drug therapy was published in May 2016, and demonstrated that for patients with drug-refractory VT, catheter ablation was superior to escalation of antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Benefits were seen in the group which had VT despite amiodarone. Event rates were similar between amiodarone and sotalol for patients with VT occurring despite sotalol, who were randomized to either new initiation of amiodarone or catheter ablation. These results do not address the clinical question of the most appropriate first line therapy for suppression of VT in persons with prior myocardial infarction, an ICD and VT. The trial hypothesis is: catheter ablation will, in comparison to antiarrhythmic drug therapy reduce the composite outcome of death at any time, appropriate ICD shock after 14 days, ventricular tachycardia storm after 14 days or treated sustained ventricular tachycardia below the detection rate of the ICD for patients with prior myocardial infarction and sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia.