PARTITA
Trial question
What is the role of VT ablation in patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator?
Study design
Multi-center
Open label
RCT
Population
Characteristics of study participants
15.0% female
85.0% male
N = 47
47 patients (7 female, 40 male)
Inclusion criteria: patients with dilated cardiomyopathy who received implantable cardioverter defibrillator shock for VT
Key exclusion criteria: contraindication to transcatheter ablation or antithrombotic therapy; chronic treatment with class I or class III antiarrhythmic drug
Interventions
N=23 ablation (VT ablation within 2 months of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator shock)
N=24 standard therapy (continuation of standard therapy)
Primary outcome
Composite outcome of death from any cause or hospitalization for worsening heart failure
4
42
42.0 %
31.5 %
21.0 %
10.5 %
0.0 %
Ablation
Standard
therapy
Significant
decrease ▼
NNT = 2
Significant decrease in composite outcome of death from any cause or hospitalization for worsening HF (4% vs. 42%; HR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.85)
Secondary outcomes
Significant decrease in death from all causes (0% vs. 33%; ARD -33, 95% CI -55.44 to -10.56)
Significant decrease in recurrent VT with shocks (9% vs. 42%; ARD -33, 95% CI -64.39 to -1.61)
No significant difference in worsening HF hospitalization (4% vs. 17%; ARD -13, 95% CI -31.07 to 5.07)
Conclusion
In patients with dilated cardiomyopathy who received implantable cardioverter defibrillator shock for VT, ablation was superior to standard therapy with respect to the composite outcome of death from any cause or hospitalization for worsening HF.
Reference
Paolo Della Bella, Francesca Baratto, Pasquale Vergara et al. Does Timing of Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation Affect Prognosis in Patients With an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator? Results From the Multicenter Randomized PARTITA Trial. Circulation. 2022 Jun 21;145(25):1829-1838.
Open reference URL