Compartir
Título
Bayesian analysis of the substrate ablation vs. antiarrhythmic drug therapy for symptomatic ventricular tachycardia trial
Autor(es)
Palabras clave
Anti-arrhythmic drugs
Bayesian analysis
Catheter ablation
Ventricular tachycardia
Fecha de publicación
2023-07-04
Editor
Oxford Academic
Citación
Ávila, P., Berruezo, A., Jiménez-Candil, J., Tercedor, L., Calvo, D., Arribas, F., Fernández-Portales, J., Merino, J. L., Hernández-Madrid, A., Fernández-Avilés, F., & Arenal, Á. (2023). Bayesian analysis of the Substrate Ablation vs. Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Symptomatic Ventricular Tachycardia trial. 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, 25(7). https://doi.org/10.1093/EUROPACE/EUAD181
Resumen
[EN]Bayesian analyses can provide additional insights into the results of clinical trials, aiding in the decision-making process. We analysed the Substrate Ablation vs. Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Symptomatic Ventricular Tachycardia (SURVIVE-VT) trial using Bayesian survival models.
The SURVIVE-VT trial randomized patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy and monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) to catheter ablation or antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD) as a first-line strategy. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks, unplanned heart failure hospitalizations, or severe treatment-related complications. We used informative, skeptical, and non-informative priors with different probabilities of large effects to compute the posterior distributions using Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods. We calculated the probabilities of hazard ratios (HR) being <1, <0.9, and <0.75, as well as 2-year survival estimates. Of the 144 randomized patients, 71 underwent catheter ablation and 73 received AAD. Regardless of the prior, catheter ablation had a >98% probability of reducing the primary outcome (HR < 1) and a >96% probability of achieving a reduction of >10% (HR < 0.9). The probability of a >25% (HR < 0.75) reduction of treatment-related complications was >90%. Catheter ablation had a high probability (>93%) of reducing incessant/slow undetected VT/electric storm, unplanned hospitalizations for ventricular arrhythmias, and overall cardiovascular admissions > 25%, with absolute differences of 15.2%, 21.2%, and 20.2%, respectively.
In patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy and VT, catheter ablation as a first-line therapy resulted in a high probability of reducing several clinical outcomes compared to AAD. Our study highlights the value of Bayesian analysis in clinical trials and its potential for guiding treatment decisions.
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03734562.
URI
ISSN
1099-5129
DOI
10.1093/europace/euad181
Versión del editor
Aparece en las colecciones













