The Risk of Ventricular Arrhythmias between Alcohol Septal Ablation and Septal Myectomy in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Meta-Analysis on Septal Reduction Therapy

Lichun Wang

doi:10.31083/j.rcm2312391

Information
Figures
References
Contents

Academic Editor

Bernard Belhassen

Download

[1]Gersh BJ, Maron BJ, Bonow RO, Dearani JA, Fifer MA, Link MS, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2011; 124: 2761–2796.
- Google Scholar
[2]Sherrid MV. Pharmacologic Therapy of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. Current Cardiology Reviews. 2015. (in press)
- Google Scholar
[3]Dimitrow PP, Rajtar-Salwa R. Obstructive Form of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy-Left Ventricular Outflow Tract Gradient: Novel Methods of Provocation, Monitoring of Biomarkers, and Recent Advances in the Treatment. BioMed Research International. 2016; 2016: 1575130.
- Google Scholar
[4]Elliott PM, Anastasakis A, Borger MA, Borggrefe M, Cecchi F, Charron P, et al. 2014 ESC Guidelines on diagnosis and management of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: the Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). European Heart Journal. 2014; 35: 2733–2739.
- Google Scholar
[5]Kim LK, Swaminathan RV, Looser P, Minutello RM, Wong SC, Bergman G, et al. Hospital Volume Outcomes after Septal Myectomy and Alcohol Septal Ablation for Treatment of Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: US Nationwide Inpatient Database, 2003–2011. JAMA Cardiology. 2016; 1: 324–332.
- Google Scholar
[6]Cuoco FA, Spencer WH, Fernandes VL, Nielsen CD, Nagueh S, Sturdivant JL, et al. Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy for Primary Prevention of Sudden Death after Alcohol Septal Ablation of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2008; 52: 1718–1723.
- Google Scholar
[7]Maron BJ. Role of alcohol septal ablation in treatment of obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. The Lancet. 2000; 355: 425–426.
- Google Scholar
[8]Noseworthy PA, Rosenberg MA, Fifer MA, Palacios IF, Lowry PA, Ruskin JN, et al. Ventricular Arrhythmia Following Alcohol Septal Ablation for Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. The American Journal of Cardiology. 2009; 104: 128–132.
- Google Scholar
[9]Batzner A, Pfeiffer B, Neugebauer A, Aicha D, Blank C, Seggewiss H. Survival after Alcohol Septal Ablation in Patients with Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2018; 72: 3087–3094.
- Google Scholar
[10]Nguyen A, Schaff HV, Hang D, Nishimura RA, Geske JB, Dearani JA, et al. Surgical Myectomy Versus Alcohol Septal Ablation for Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2019; 157: 306–315.
- Google Scholar
[11]Osman M, Kheiri B, Osman K, Barbarawi M, Alhamoud H, Alqahtani F, et al. Alcohol Septal Ablation vs Myectomy for Symptomatic Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy: Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis. Clinical Cardiology. 2019; 42: 190–197.
- Google Scholar
[12]Bytyçi I, Nistri S, Mörner S, Henein MY. Alcohol Septal Ablation versus Septal Myectomy Treatment of Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2020; 9: 3062.
- Google Scholar
[13]Lemor A, Villablanca PA, Hosseini Dehkordi SH, Mand R, Hernandez GA, Jain T, et al. Comparison of Outcomes of Alcohol Septal Ablation or Septal Myectomy for Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy in Patients ≤65 Years Versus >65 Years. The American Journal of Cardiology. 2020; 127: 128–134.
- Google Scholar
[14]Afanasyev AV, Bogachev-Prokophiev AV, Kashtanov MG, Astapov DA, Zalesov AS, Budagaev SA, et al. Myectomy versus alcohol septal ablation in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery. 2020; 31: 158–165.
- Google Scholar
[15]Kimmelstiel C, Zisa DC, Kuttab JS, Wells S, Udelson JE, Wessler BS, et al. Guideline-Based Referral for Septal Reduction Therapy in Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy is Associated with Excellent Clinical Outcomes. Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions. 2019; 12: e007673.
- Google Scholar
[16]Guo H, Li J, Jiang T, Ren C, Dai J, Zhou Y, et al. Comparison of Clinical Effects between Percutaneous Transluminal Septal Myocardial Ablation and Modified Morrow Septal Myectomy on Patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. Chinese Medical Journal. 2018; 131: 527–531.
- Google Scholar
[17]Cavigli L, Fumagalli C, Maurizi N, Rossi A, Arretini A, Targetti M, et al. Timing of invasive septal reduction therapies and outcome of patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. International Journal of Cardiology. 2018; 273: 155–161.
- Google Scholar
[18]Yang Y, Fan C, Yuan J, Wang S, Song Y, Qiao S, et al. Effectiveness of Alcohol Septal Ablation Versus Transaortic Extended Myectomy in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy with Midventricular Obstruction. Journal of Interventional Cardiology. 2016; 29: 619–627.
- Google Scholar
[19]Sedehi D, Finocchiaro G, Tibayan Y, Chi J, Pavlovic A, Kim YM, et al. Long-term outcomes of septal reduction for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Journal of Cardiology. 2015; 66: 57–62.
- Google Scholar
[20]Vriesendorp PA, Liebregts M, Steggerda RC, Schinkel AFL, Willems R, ten Cate FJ, et al. Long-Term Outcomes after Medical and Invasive Treatment in Patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. JACC: Heart Failure. 2014; 2: 630–636.
- Google Scholar
[21]Steggerda RC, Damman K, Balt JC, Liebregts M, ten Berg JM, van den Berg MP. Periprocedural Complications and Long-Term Outcome after Alcohol Septal Ablation Versus Surgical Myectomy in Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy: a single-center experience. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions. 2014; 7: 1227–1234.
- Google Scholar
[22]Samardhi H, Walters DL, Raffel C, Rateesh S, Harley C, Burstow D, et al. The long-term outcomes of transcoronary ablation of septal hypertrophy compared to surgical myectomy in patients with symptomatic hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2014; 83: 270–277.
- Google Scholar
[23]Sorajja P, Ommen SR, Holmes DR, Dearani JA, Rihal CS, Gersh BJ, et al. Survival after Alcohol Septal Ablation for Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. Circulation. 2012; 126: 2374–2380.
- Google Scholar
[24]ten Cate FJ, Soliman OII, Michels M, Theuns DAMJ, de Jong PL, Geleijnse ML, et al. Long-Term Outcome of Alcohol Septal Ablation in Patients with Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: a word of caution. Circulation: Heart Failure. 2010; 3: 362–369.
- Google Scholar
[25]Valeti US, Nishimura RA, Holmes DR, Araoz PA, Glockner JF, Breen JF, et al. Comparison of Surgical Septal Myectomy and Alcohol Septal Ablation with Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients with Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2007; 49: 350–357.
- Google Scholar
[26]van der Lee C, ten Cate FJ, Geleijnse ML, Kofflard MJ, Pedone C, van Herwerden LA, et al. Percutaneous Versus Surgical Treatment for Patients with Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy and Enlarged Anterior Mitral Valve Leaflets. Circulation. 2005; 112: 482–488.
- Google Scholar
[27]Ralph-Edwards A, Woo A, McCrindle BW, Shapero JL, Schwartz L, Rakowski H, et al. Hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy: Comparison of outcomes after myectomy or alcohol ablation adjusted by propensity score. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2005; 129: 351–358.
- Google Scholar
[28]Jiang TY, Wu XS, Lu Q, Meng X, Jia CQ, Zhang Y. Transcoronary ablation of septal hypertrophy compared with surgery in the treatment of hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. China Medical Journal. 2004; 117: 296–298.
- Google Scholar
[29]Firoozi S, Elliott PM, Sharma S, Murday A, Brecker SJ, Hamid MS, et al. Septal Myotomy-Myectomy and Transcoronary Septal Alcohol Ablation in Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy. A Comparison of Clinical, Haemodynamic and Exercise Outcomes. European Heart Journal. 2002; 23: 1617–1624.
- Google Scholar
[30]Qin JX, Shiota T, Lever HM, Kapadia SR, Sitges M, Rubin DN, et al. Outcome of patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy after percutaneous transluminal septal myocardial ablation and septal myectomy surgery. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2001; 38: 1994–2000.
- Google Scholar
[31]Nagueh SF, Ommen SR, Lakkis NM, Killip D, Zoghbi WA, Schaff HV, et al. Comparison of ethanol septal reduction therapy with surgical myectomy for the treatment of hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2001; 38: 1701–1706.
- Google Scholar
[32]Gorenek B, Blomström Lundqvist C, Brugada Terradellas J, Camm AJ, Hindricks G, Huber K, et al. Cardiac arrhythmias in acute coronary syndromes: position paper from the joint EHRA, ACCA, and EAPCI task force. Europace. 2014; 16: 1655–1673.
- Google Scholar
[33]Singh K, Qutub M, Carson K, Hibbert B, Glover C. A meta analysis of current status of alcohol septal ablation and surgical myectomy for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2016; 88: 107–115.
- Google Scholar
[34]Ommen SR, Mital S, Burke MA, Day SM, Deswal A, Elliott P, et al. 2020 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2020; 142: e533–e557.
- Google Scholar
[35]Balt JC, Wijffels MCEF, Boersma LVA, Wever EFD, ten Berg JM. Continuous rhythm monitoring for ventricular arrhythmias after alcohol septal ablation for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Heart. 2014; 100: 1865–1870.
- Google Scholar
[36]Maron BJ, Shen W, Link MS, Epstein AE, Almquist AK, Daubert JP, et al. Efficacy of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators for the Prevention of Sudden Death in Patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. New England Journal of Medicine. 2000; 342: 365–373.
- Google Scholar
[37]McGregor JB, Rahman A, Rosanio S, Ware D, Birnbaum Y, Saeed M. Monomorphic Ventricular Tachycardia: a Late Complication of Percutaneous Alcohol Septal Ablation for Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. The American Journal of the Medical Sciences. 2004; 328: 185–188.
- Google Scholar
[38]McLeod CJ, Ommen SR, Ackerman MJ, Weivoda PL, Shen WK, Dearani JA, et al. Surgical septal myectomy decreases the risk for appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator discharge in obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. European Heart Journal. 2007; 28: 2583–2588.
- Google Scholar
[39]Liebregts M, Vriesendorp PA, Mahmoodi BK, Schinkel AF, Michels M, ten Berg JM. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Long-Term Outcomes After Septal Reduction Therapy in Patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. JACC: Heart Fail. 2015; 3: 896–905.
- Google Scholar

Open Access 30 Nov 2022Systematic Review

The Risk of Ventricular Arrhythmias between Alcohol Septal Ablation and Septal Myectomy in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Meta-Analysis on Septal Reduction Therapy

Wei Tang ^1,2,†, Menghui Liu ^1,2,†, Jie Li ^1,2, Rongxuan Chang ^1,2, Chen Su ^1,2, Xiaoyu Zhang ^1,2, Lichun Wang ^1,2,*

Affiliations

Article Info

¹ Department of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, 510080 Guangzhou, Guangdong, China

² Department of Medicine College, Sun Yat-sen University, 510080 Guangzhou, Guangdong, China

^*Correspondence: wanglich@mail.sysu.edu.cn (Lichun Wang)
^†These authors contributed equally.
Academic Editors: Matteo Bertini, Bernard Belhassen and Fabian Sanchis-Gomar

Abstract

Background: Alcohol septal ablation (ASA) has been more commonly applied in medical refractory hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM) compared with septal myectomy (SM), however its potential to create a proarrhythmic substrate is increased. Methods: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to October 2020. Fixed or random effects models were used to estimate the risk ratios (RR) for ventricular arrhythmia events or other outcomes between the SM and ASA cohorts. Results: Twenty studies with 8025 patients were included. Pool analysis showed that the incidence of ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF), which included appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) intervention, was significantly higher in the ASA cohort than that in the SM cohort (ASA vs SM: 10% (345/3312) vs 5% (161/3227) (RR = 1.98, 95% CI (confidence interval), 1.65–2.37; p $<$ 0.00001, I ${}^{2}$ = 0%). In both groups, more than 90% of VT/VF events occurred in the early phase (during the procedure, during hospitalization or within 30 days after the procedure) (ASA: 94.20%; SM: 94.41%). Further subgroup analysis also showed that the ASA group had a higher incidence of VT/VF in both the early phase (RR = 1.94, 95% CI, 1.61–2.33; p $<$ 0.0001, I ${}^{2}$ = 0%) and the late phase (RR = 2.80, 95% CI, 1.00–7.89; p = 0.05, I ${}^{2}$ = 33%). Furthermore, although the risks of sudden cardiac death (SCD) were similar between the ASA and SM groups, a higher incidence of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA), which included SCD and resuscitated SCA, was observed in the ASA group (RR = 2.30, 95% CI, 1.35–3.94; p = 0.002, I ${}^{2}$ = 0%). Conclusions: In patients with HOCM, those who received ASA showed a higher incidence of VF/VT and SCD combined with resuscitated SCA. The majority of VT/VF occurred in the early phase.

Keywords

hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
septal reduction therapy
alcohol septal ablation
septal myectomy
ventricular arrhythmias
meta-analysis

1. Introduction

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HOCM) is the most common inherited cardiovascular disease. The majority of patients have an abnormally thickened ventricular septum, which could lead to systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve and obstruction of the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) [1]. Initial pharmacological therapy including beta-blockers and verapamil produces a negative inotropic effect to relieve the obstruction [2, 3]. In patients who are refractory to medical treatments, septal reduction therapy (SRT) is indicated. Surgical septal myectomy (SM) and alcohol septal ablation (ASA) are the two most common SRTs [4]. Although there is no randomized controlled study (RCT) comparing these two treatments, an increasing number of ASAs are being performed due to its reduced invasiveness [5].

Unlike the direct resection of the hypertrophic cardiac muscle, ASA works by inducing an iatrogenic myocardial infarction. In theory, it could be a potential substrate for ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac deaths (SCD) [6, 7]. Although the possible proarrhythmic properties of ASA has been proposed since its emergence [8], this has not been substantiated in more recent studies [9, 10]. Furthermore, previous meta-analyses or systematic reviews comparing SM and ASA, such as the latest two from Mohammed et al. [11] and Ibadete et al. [12] in 2019 and 2020, respectively, rarely compared ventricular arrhythmic events. Therefore, in the current study, we focused on the incidence of post-procedure ventricular arrhythmic events between these two therapies. The aim was to analyze whether ASA would increase the risk of ventricular arrythmias.

2. Methods

The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement was followed in this meta-analysis. Due to the study design, neither institutional review board (IRB) approval nor informed patient consent was needed.

2.1 Literature Search

A systematic search was performed in PubMed-Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases using the terms “hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy”, “idiopathic hypertrophic sub-aortic stenosis”, “asymmetric septal hypertrophy”, “septal reduction therapy”, “septal myectomy”, “Morrow septal myectomy”, “modified morrow septal myectomy”, “alcohol septal ablation” and “percutaneous transluminal myocardial ablation”. No time limit to the start date was applied, and the search was conducted up to October 2020. The detailed search strategies are presented in Supplementary Table 1. The inclusion criteria included (a) studies comparing the outcomes of ASA and SM; (b) enrolled patients $\geq$ 18 years; (c) published language restricted to English or a complete English translation version; and (d) follow-up the studies were more than 30 days.

2.2 Data Extraction

Two examiners (WT, ML) independently screened the titles and abstracts (if available) of the entries identified in different databases. Next, the full text of all studies that met the eligibility criteria or those with insufficient information from the titles or abstracts to make a decision, were obtained for the next screening phase. All studies that did not meet the criteria were excluded, and the reasons for exclusion were noted. Case reports and series, review articles, editorials and duplicate reports were excluded. For those studies that reported the same study or utilized the repeated data at different follow-up intervals, we pooled all the relevant details together and used the most comprehensive data for further analysis. A third member (JL) would further check the data whenever there was disagreement until a consensus was reached. Data from the included studies were then extracted by two independent reviewers (WT, ML) based on a predesigned outline. The extracted information included the design of the study, study population (number of participants, age, and sex), length of follow-up, clinical characteristics and outcomes such as the pre- and post-procedure left ventricular outflow tract pressure gradient, sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) events (including appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) intervention) during and post-procedure, SCD and resuscitated sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) events post-procedure, the ICD implantation rate and permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation rate post procedure, the reintervention rate and all-cause or cardiac mortality post procedure. Additional details are presented in Table 1 (Ref. [10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31]). VF/VT events were divided into an early-phase (which occurred during the procedure, during hospitalization or within 30 days after the procedure) and a late-phase (which occurred $>$ 30 days after the procedure and out of hospital) subgroup.

Table 1.Clinical characteristics of enrolled studies ${}^{a}$ .

Study, year

No. of patients (n)

Age (mean

\pm

SD)/mean (range)

Male (%)

Resting LVOT PG (mmHg)

Post-procedure LVOT PG (mmHg)

Prior ICD (n)

Follow-up (years)

Reported outcomes

ASA

Nagueh SF, 2001 [31]

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

Mortality, PPM/ICD, VA

Qin JX, 2001 [30]

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

0.25

Mortality, NYHA class, Reintervention, PPM

Firoozi S, 2002 [29]

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

Mortality, PPM, NYHA class

Jiang TY, 2004 [28]

45 (13–74)

36 (11–69)

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

Mortality, NYHA class, VA

Ralph-Edwards A, 2005 [27]

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

15 (0, 96)

5 (0, 17)

2.2

Mortality, PPM

Van der Lee C, 2005 [26]

\pm

\pm

101

\pm

100

\pm

\pm

\pm

Mortality, NYHA class, PPM, VA, reintervention

Valeti US, 2007 [25]

\pm

\pm

62.5

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

1.2

CMR outcomes, VA, PPM

Ten Cate FJ, 2010 [24]

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

5.4

Mortality, SCD, VA, PPM

Sorajja P, 2012 [23]

177

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

Mortality, SCD, VA, PPM

Steggerda RC, 2014 [21]

161

102

\pm

\pm

32 (18–75)

50 (25–75)

10 (7–19)

9 (4–10)

5.1

Mortality, NYHA class, VA, reintervention

Samardhi H, 2014 [22]

\pm

14.7

\pm

20.6

43.5

74.0

\pm

59.5

75.5

\pm

38.4

27.2

\pm

37.5

12.9

\pm

27.0

Mortality, NYHA class, VA, reintervention, PPM

Vriesendorp PA, 2014 [20]

321

253

\pm

\pm

102

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

7.5

Mortality, SCD, VA

Sedehi D, 2015 [19]

171

57.3

\pm

12.9

48.0

\pm

17.1

67.1

\pm

26.9

67.4

\pm

43.4

23.9

\pm

29.4

11.2

\pm

16.4

3.2

NYHA class, survival, PPM

Yang YJ, 2016 [18]

45.5

\pm

8.1

44.6

\pm

79.7

\pm

21.2

69.0

\pm

23.9

43.7

\pm

28.9

15.0

\pm

16.9

NYHA class, CMR outcomes, VA

Cavigli L, 2018 [17]

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

\pm

Mortality, SCD, ICD/PPM, reintervention

Guo HC, 2018 [16]

158

\pm

\pm

151

70.30

\pm

44.79

74.58

\pm

45.52

39.78

\pm

22.07

13.95

\pm

9.94

Mortality, VA, ICD/PPM, reintervention

Nguyen A, 2019 [10]

167

334

\pm

\pm

44.3

45.8

65 (29–100)

60 (32–85)

5 (0–15)

0.0 (0.0–3.0)

2.6

NYHA class, Survival, ICD/PPM

Kimmelstiel C, 2019 [15]

378

66.3

\pm

11.9

52.7

\pm

14.7

65.7

\pm

40.7

58.0

\pm

41.8

4.0

Mortality, NYHA class, ICD/PPM, VA, reintervention

Lemor A, 2020 [13]

2245

2113

62.0

\pm

13.6

53.5

\pm

13.6

41.3

46.5

245

285

Mortality, VA, ICD/PPM

Afanasyev AV, 2020 [14]

105

52.2

\pm

51.9

\pm

14.3

52.4

54.3

72 (48–90)

78 (63–90)

10 (0–20)

12 (8–20)

Mortality, SCD, PPM, Reintervention

{}^{a}

Values are presented as means

\pm{}

SD or medians (25–75 percentiles) for non-normally distributed data.
Abbreviations: LVOT, left ventricular outflow tract; PG, pressure gradient; ICD, implantable cardioverter defibrillator; ASA, alcohol septal ablation; SM, septal myectomy; NYHA, New York heart association; VA, ventricular arrhythmias; SCD, sudden cardiac death; PPM, permanent peacemaker; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance.

2.3 Quality Assessment

Since all of the included studies were observational, the assessment of the risk of bias was evaluated by a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS), which is a quality assessment tool for nonrandomized studies in three domains: the selection of participants, comparability of study groups, and the outcome of interest. The risk of bias in each study was evaluated by calculating the aggregate score on the 9 items. The detailed assessment of each study is shown in Supplementary Table 2.

2.4 Statistical Analysis

The data analysis was conducted by Review Manager 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, England) and Stata (version 15.1, StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). Continuous variables were reported as the means $\pm{}$ standard deviation (SD) if they were normally distributed; otherwise, they were reported as medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs). The pooled effects are presented as the relative ratio (RR) or weighted mean difference (WMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI), and sensitivity analyses were performed when significant heterogeneity was observed. The heterogeneity between studies was considered significant with an I ${}^{2}$ of more than 50% and a p value less than 0.05. The meta-analyses were performed with the fixed model when the heterogeneity between studies was not significant; otherwise, the randomized effect model was used, and sensitivity analyses were also needed. Publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots and Egger’s test. p $<$ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

3. Results

3.1 Search Results

A total of 1185 articles were initially retrieved from PubMed, Embase, the Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. After removing duplicates, 580 articles were left for title and abstract review. Thirty-five full-text articles were further assessed for eligibility, and 20 studies were ultimately included for data extraction and analysis [10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] (Fig. 1). All studies were observational studies. The risk of bias was evaluated by the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (Supplementary Table 2). Among them, 5 studies acquired 6/9 points, 12 studies acquired 7/9 points, and the remaining 3 studies acquired 8/9 points.

Fig. 1.

Flow chart of literature search.

3.2 Study Characteristics

The study characteristics are presented in Table 1. A total of 8025 patients were included in the 20 studies. Among them, 3860 patients received ASA treatment, and the remaining 4165 patients underwent SM. The mean follow-up periods varied from 3 months to 120 months. Of the 20 enrolled studies, twelve studies had a specific description of VT/VF events (including appropriate ICD intervention), eight studies contained descriptions about SCD and resuscitated SCA, and ten studies collected data about ICD implantation. The baseline LVOT pressure gradient was higher in the ASA groups (WMD = 5.89; 95% CI: 3.03–8.75; p $<$ 0.0001; I ${}^{2}$ = 1%, Supplementary Fig. 1a). The baseline interventricular septal diameter (IVSd) in diastole was slightly thinner in the ASA groups (WMD = –0.68; 95% CI: –1.35, –0.02; p = 0.04; I ${}^{2}$ = 43%, Supplementary Fig. 2a), while the number of patients in NYHA class III/IV and the left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDd) prior to the intervention were similar between the two groups (p = 0.36, p = 0.51, Supplementary Figs. 1b,2b).

3.3 Analysis of VF/VT Events

Among the 20 enrolled studies, 12 studies contained descriptions of VT/VF events (including ICD intervention). The pooled analysis showed that the incidence of total VT/VF events was almost twice as high in the ASA group (345/3312, 10.42%) than in the SM group (61/3227 patients, 4.99%) (RR = 1.98; 95% CI: 1.65–2.37; p $<$ 0.0001; I ${}^{2}$ = 0%, Fig. 2a). When VT/VF events were classified as early-phase and late-phase, the data showed that more than 90% of VT/VF events occurred in the early-phase in both groups (ASA: 94.20%; SM: 94.41%). Further subgroup analysis indicated that VT/VF was significantly higher in the ASA group than in the SM group in both the early phase (RR = 1.94; 95% CI: 1.61–2.33; p $<$ 0.0001; I ${}^{2}$ = 0%, Fig. 2b) and the late phase (RR = 2.80; 95% CI: 1.00–7.89; p = 0.05; I ${}^{2}$ = 33%, Fig. 2c). The sensitivity analysis of the enrolled studies demonstrated that the removal of each of them did not change the result of the pooled analysis (Supplementary Table 3). In addition, possible publication bias was not found in the funnel plot (Supplementary Fig. 3) or Egger’s test (p = 0.101). Further meta regression showed no significant interaction between the incidence of VT/VF with LVOT pressure gradient reduction (p = 0.904/0.220), with baseline ejection fraction (EF) (p = 0.552/0.685), with baseline IVSd (p = 0.799/0.054), and with baseline NYHA class III/IV proportion (p = 0.165/0.364) in both ASA and SM cohorts (Supplementary Figs. 5–8).

Fig. 2.

Comparisons of ventricular fibrillation (VT)/ventricular tachycardia (VF)/appropriate ICD intervention events between ASA groups and SM groups. (a) Total VF/VT events. (b) Early-phase VF/VT events. (c) Late-phase VF/VT events.

3.4 Analysis of SCD and SCA

The SCD and resuscitated SCA were combined as SCA to estimate the risk for SCD together in this analysis. In the 8 studies that described SCD and/or resuscitated SCA events, a total of 49 events were reported in the ASA group (SCD: 26; resuscitated SCA: 23), and 17 events were reported in the SM group (SCD: 13; resuscitated SCA: 4). The pooled analysis showed that the ASA group had a higher incidence of SCA (RR = 2.30; 95% CI: 1.35–3.94; p = 0.002; I ${}^{2}$ = 0%, Fig. 3a). However, when SCD was considered alone, the pooled analysis showed no significant difference between the two groups (ASA cohorts: 28/824, 3.40%; SM cohorts: 13/730, 1.8%; RR = 1.70; 95% CI: 0.90–3.18; p = 0.10; I ${}^{2}$ = 0%, Fig. 3b). Possible publication bias was also not found in the funnel plot (Supplementary Fig. 4) or Egger’s test (p = 0.667).

Fig. 3.

Comparison of the incidence of sudden cardiac death (SCD)/resuscitated sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) after ASA and SM. (a) Combined SCD/resuscitated SCA events. (b) SCD events alone.

3.5 Analysis of All-Cause Mortality

All-cause mortality within 30 days and above 30 days after receiving ASA or SM was regarded as early-phase and late-phase mortality, respectively. For the ASA cohorts, there were 38 early-phase deaths and 89 late-phase deaths among 3361 (1.13%) and 1055 patients (8.43%), respectively, while in the SM cohorts, there were 75 early-phase deaths and 88 late-phase deaths among 3520 (2.13%) and 1304 patients (6.75%), respectively. The pooled analysis showed no significant differences between ASA and SM in either early-phase mortality (RR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.37–1.41; p = 0.34; I ${}^{2}$ = 31%) or late-phase all-cause mortality (RR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.63–1.69; p = 0.89; I ${}^{2}$ = 39%) (Table 2).

Table 2.The difference of risks of various post-procedure outcomes in patients received ASA or SM.

Post-procedure outcomes	Number of studies	ASA group		SM group		RR	95% CI	p value	I ${}^{2}$ , %
Post-procedure outcomes	Number of studies	Event	Total patients	Event	Total patients	RR	95% CI	p value	I ${}^{2}$ , %
Early-phase death	11	38	3361	75	3520	0.72	0.37–1.41	0.34	31.00
Late-phase death	9	89	1055	88	1304	1.04	0.63–1.69	0.89	39.00
PPM implantation	17	404	3474	240	3864	1.99	1.39–2.83	$<$ 0.01	50.00
ICD implantation	10	123	1208	89	1589	1.67	0.98–2.86	0.06	64.00
Reintervention	8	68	603	5	892	10.50	5.10–21.64	$<$ 0.01	0.00
Abbreviation: ASA, alcohol septal ablation; SM, septal myectomy; PPM, permanent peacemaker; ICD, implantable cardioverter defibrillator; RR, risk ratio; CI, confidence interval.

3.6 Analysis of Pacemaker and ICD Implantation and Reintervention after the Procedure

After ASA, 404 patients were implanted with a permanent pacemaker in the 3474 pooled patients (11.63%), which was significantly higher compared with (240/3864, 6.21%) after SM (RR = 1.99; 95% CI: 1.39–2.83; p = 0.0002; I ${}^{2}$ = 50%; Table 2). In addition, the pooled analysis indicated that patients receiving ICD implantation were not significantly different between the two cohorts (ASA group: 123/1208, 10.18%; SM group: 89/1589, 5.60%; RR = 1.67; 95% CI: 0.98–2.86; p = 0.06; I ${}^{2}$ = 64%, Table 2). The reintervention rate was significantly higher in the ASA group than in the SM group (ASA vs SM: 11.28% vs 0.56%; RR = 10.50; 95% CI: 5.10–21.64; p $<$ 0.0001; I ${}^{2}$ = 0%; Table 2).

4. Discussion

Our results showed that the risk of ventricular arrhythmias (VT/VF and appropriate ICD intervention) and SCA (SCD and resuscitated SCA) were higher in the ASA cohort than in the SM cohort. Additionally, pacemaker implantation and reintervention were required more often in the ASA group, but there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between the two groups.

Due to several metabolic, autonomic, and electrophysiological changes, myocardial infarction can be arrhythmogenic and is closely related to lethal arrhythmias and SCD [32]. Hence the iatrogenic myocardial infarction resulting from ASA increases the potential risk for life-threatening arrhythmias [1, 6, 7, 8]. However, in recent years, these concerns have not been substantiated [9, 33]. Therefore, the latest 2020 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guideline still indicate that further studies are needed [34]. In this analysis, we compared the incidence of VT/VF between the ASA and SM groups. The results showed that the ASA cohort had a higher risk of VT/VF, even when it was divided into the early phase (during the procedure, during hospitalization or within 30 days after the procedure) and late phase ( $>$ 30 days after the procedure and out of the hospital). In addition, we found that more than 90% of VT/VF events occurred in the early phase. This indicates that the proarrhythmic risk should not be neglected after ASA, especially in the early-phase after the procedure. Other studies have also reported this phenomenon. Balt JC et al. [35] found that sustained VT or VF attacks were recorded only within 30 days after ASA by continuous rhythm monitoring. The generation of heterogeneous iatrogenic intramyocardial scars is generally believed to be the mechanism for VT/VF after ASA [35]. A previous study reported that the VT attacks in HOCM patients who did not receive invasive therapies were predominantly polymorphic [36], while the VT recorded after ASA often manifested as monomorphic VT [36, 37]. This finding indicates that VT/VF after ASA is probably a pattern of re-entrant arrhythmias related to the iatrogenic intramyocardial scar. In addition, the high reintervention rate in ASA may indicate that the reduction in the LVOT pressure gradient was not ideal in some patients. This might explain the higher incidence of VT/VF in the ASA cohort; since a previous study suggested that the relief of the LVOT pressure gradient would decrease the appropriate ICD discharge by improving cardiac haemodynamics [38].

SCD is one of the most devastating complications of HOCM. Most recent studies and meta-analyses showed no significant difference in SCD between ASA and SM [39]. In this analysis, we also did not find that the incidence of SCD was significantly different in the ASA and SM groups. However, when we regarded SCD and resuscitated sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) as a single event (SCA), the ASA group had more than twice the incidence than the SM group. This suggests that patients receiving ASA were more likely to be exposed to SCD and more dependent on effective resuscitation or ICD intervention. This was consistent with the higher incidence of malignant ventricular arrhythmias after ASA.

Our meta-analysis also found some results consistent with those of previous studies [11, 39]. ASA is as effective as SM in decreasing LVOT pressure and relieving obstructive symptoms. Patients receiving ASA are more likely to require permanent peacemakers and reinterventions. ASA and SM carry similar low risk for early- or late-phase mortality. Both therapies tend to be more effective in reducing symptoms than medical management alone. In those patients who are refractory to adequate medical therapy, the results of our meta-analysis may be helpful in determining the selection of ASA vs SM for an individual patient in order to achieve the best clinical outcomes.

5. Limitations

There are several limitations in this study. First, the absence of an RCT to compare ASA and SM inevitably brings about the concern for selection bias since we conducted a sensitivity analysis regarding the incidence of VF/VT, which further supports our results. In addition, as the study from Lemor et al. [13] collected the data from the National Readmission Database, its study size was much larger than that of other studies. Thus, it was weighted as the absolute majority in the pooled analysis, which could lead to some bias; however, this concern could also be relieved by the sensitivity analysis, where we could obtain the same result even if this study were excluded from the cohorts. Another limitation is that we included some studies from 20 years ago. Since that time, there have been significant improvements in both but the development of ASA and SM techniques; however, Liebregts et al. [39] found no association between the study period and all-cause mortality.

6. Conclusions

Patients with HOCM who underwent ASA had nearly more than twice the risk of VF/VT events. Most events occurred during the procedure or during hospitalization or within 30 days post-procedure. In addition, patients who receive ASA were more likely to be exposed to SCD and resuscitated SCA.

Abbreviations

ASA, Alcohol septal ablation; SM, Septal myectomy; SRT, Septal reduction therapy; HOCM, Hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy; LVOT, Left ventricular outflow tract; VT, Ventricular tachycardia; VF, Ventricular fibrillation; SCD, Sudden cardiac death; SCA, Sudden cardiac arrest; ICD, Implantable cardioverter defibrillator; PPM, Permanent pacemaker; IVSd, Intraventricular septal diameter; RR, Risk ratio; WMD, Weighted mean difference; CI, Confidence interval; NYHA, New York Heart Association.

Author Contributions

WT and ML contributed equally to this article. WT performed the article search and data extraction regarding the two treatments and was also a major contributor in writing the manuscript. ML analyzed and interpreted the final included data. JL and RC designed and prepared the tables and figures. CS and XZ were responsible for revising the manuscript. LW designed the work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate

Not applicable.

Acknowledgment

Not applicable.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: IMR Press stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

[1] Gersh BJ, Maron BJ, Bonow RO, Dearani JA, Fifer MA, Link MS, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2011; 124: 2761–2796.
Cited within: 2Google Scholar Crossref
[2] Sherrid MV. Pharmacologic Therapy of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. Current Cardiology Reviews. 2015. (in press)
Cited within: 1Google Scholar Crossref
[3] Dimitrow PP, Rajtar-Salwa R. Obstructive Form of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy-Left Ventricular Outflow Tract Gradient: Novel Methods of Provocation, Monitoring of Biomarkers, and Recent Advances in the Treatment. BioMed Research International. 2016; 2016: 1575130.
Cited within: 1Google Scholar PubMed Crossref
[4] Elliott PM, Anastasakis A, Borger MA, Borggrefe M, Cecchi F, Charron P, et al. 2014 ESC Guidelines on diagnosis and management of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: the Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). European Heart Journal. 2014; 35: 2733–2739.
Cited within: 1Google Scholar Crossref
[5] Kim LK, Swaminathan RV, Looser P, Minutello RM, Wong SC, Bergman G, et al. Hospital Volume Outcomes after Septal Myectomy and Alcohol Septal Ablation for Treatment of Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: US Nationwide Inpatient Database, 2003–2011. JAMA Cardiology. 2016; 1: 324–332.
Cited within: 1Google Scholar Crossref
[6] Cuoco FA, Spencer WH, Fernandes VL, Nielsen CD, Nagueh S, Sturdivant JL, et al. Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy for Primary Prevention of Sudden Death after Alcohol Septal Ablation of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2008; 52: 1718–1723.
Cited within: 2Google Scholar Crossref
[7] Maron BJ. Role of alcohol septal ablation in treatment of obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. The Lancet. 2000; 355: 425–426.
Cited within: 2Google Scholar Crossref
[8] Noseworthy PA, Rosenberg MA, Fifer MA, Palacios IF, Lowry PA, Ruskin JN, et al. Ventricular Arrhythmia Following Alcohol Septal Ablation for Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. The American Journal of Cardiology. 2009; 104: 128–132.
Cited within: 2Google Scholar Crossref
[9] Batzner A, Pfeiffer B, Neugebauer A, Aicha D, Blank C, Seggewiss H. Survival after Alcohol Septal Ablation in Patients with Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2018; 72: 3087–3094.
Cited within: 2Google Scholar PubMed Crossref
[10] Nguyen A, Schaff HV, Hang D, Nishimura RA, Geske JB, Dearani JA, et al. Surgical Myectomy Versus Alcohol Septal Ablation for Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2019; 157: 306–315.
Cited within: 4Google Scholar Crossref
[11] Osman M, Kheiri B, Osman K, Barbarawi M, Alhamoud H, Alqahtani F, et al. Alcohol Septal Ablation vs Myectomy for Symptomatic Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy: Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis. Clinical Cardiology. 2019; 42: 190–197.
Cited within: 2Google Scholar Crossref
[12] Bytyçi I, Nistri S, Mörner S, Henein MY. Alcohol Septal Ablation versus Septal Myectomy Treatment of Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2020; 9: 3062.
Cited within: 1Google Scholar PubMed Crossref
[13] Lemor A, Villablanca PA, Hosseini Dehkordi SH, Mand R, Hernandez GA, Jain T, et al. Comparison of Outcomes of Alcohol Septal Ablation or Septal Myectomy for Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy in Patients $\leq$ 65 Years Versus $>$ 65 Years. The American Journal of Cardiology. 2020; 127: 128–134.
Cited within: 4Google Scholar Crossref
[14] Afanasyev AV, Bogachev-Prokophiev AV, Kashtanov MG, Astapov DA, Zalesov AS, Budagaev SA, et al. Myectomy versus alcohol septal ablation in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery. 2020; 31: 158–165.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[15] Kimmelstiel C, Zisa DC, Kuttab JS, Wells S, Udelson JE, Wessler BS, et al. Guideline-Based Referral for Septal Reduction Therapy in Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy is Associated with Excellent Clinical Outcomes. Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions. 2019; 12: e007673.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[16] Guo H, Li J, Jiang T, Ren C, Dai J, Zhou Y, et al. Comparison of Clinical Effects between Percutaneous Transluminal Septal Myocardial Ablation and Modified Morrow Septal Myectomy on Patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. Chinese Medical Journal. 2018; 131: 527–531.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[17] Cavigli L, Fumagalli C, Maurizi N, Rossi A, Arretini A, Targetti M, et al. Timing of invasive septal reduction therapies and outcome of patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. International Journal of Cardiology. 2018; 273: 155–161.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[18] Yang Y, Fan C, Yuan J, Wang S, Song Y, Qiao S, et al. Effectiveness of Alcohol Septal Ablation Versus Transaortic Extended Myectomy in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy with Midventricular Obstruction. Journal of Interventional Cardiology. 2016; 29: 619–627.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[19] Sedehi D, Finocchiaro G, Tibayan Y, Chi J, Pavlovic A, Kim YM, et al. Long-term outcomes of septal reduction for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Journal of Cardiology. 2015; 66: 57–62.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[20] Vriesendorp PA, Liebregts M, Steggerda RC, Schinkel AFL, Willems R, ten Cate FJ, et al. Long-Term Outcomes after Medical and Invasive Treatment in Patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. JACC: Heart Failure. 2014; 2: 630–636.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[21] Steggerda RC, Damman K, Balt JC, Liebregts M, ten Berg JM, van den Berg MP. Periprocedural Complications and Long-Term Outcome after Alcohol Septal Ablation Versus Surgical Myectomy in Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy: a single-center experience. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions. 2014; 7: 1227–1234.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar PubMed Crossref
[22] Samardhi H, Walters DL, Raffel C, Rateesh S, Harley C, Burstow D, et al. The long-term outcomes of transcoronary ablation of septal hypertrophy compared to surgical myectomy in patients with symptomatic hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2014; 83: 270–277.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[23] Sorajja P, Ommen SR, Holmes DR, Dearani JA, Rihal CS, Gersh BJ, et al. Survival after Alcohol Septal Ablation for Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. Circulation. 2012; 126: 2374–2380.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[24] ten Cate FJ, Soliman OII, Michels M, Theuns DAMJ, de Jong PL, Geleijnse ML, et al. Long-Term Outcome of Alcohol Septal Ablation in Patients with Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: a word of caution. Circulation: Heart Failure. 2010; 3: 362–369.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[25] Valeti US, Nishimura RA, Holmes DR, Araoz PA, Glockner JF, Breen JF, et al. Comparison of Surgical Septal Myectomy and Alcohol Septal Ablation with Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients with Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2007; 49: 350–357.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[26] van der Lee C, ten Cate FJ, Geleijnse ML, Kofflard MJ, Pedone C, van Herwerden LA, et al. Percutaneous Versus Surgical Treatment for Patients with Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy and Enlarged Anterior Mitral Valve Leaflets. Circulation. 2005; 112: 482–488.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[27] Ralph-Edwards A, Woo A, McCrindle BW, Shapero JL, Schwartz L, Rakowski H, et al. Hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy: Comparison of outcomes after myectomy or alcohol ablation adjusted by propensity score. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2005; 129: 351–358.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar PubMed Crossref
[28] Jiang TY, Wu XS, Lu Q, Meng X, Jia CQ, Zhang Y. Transcoronary ablation of septal hypertrophy compared with surgery in the treatment of hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. China Medical Journal. 2004; 117: 296–298.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[29] Firoozi S, Elliott PM, Sharma S, Murday A, Brecker SJ, Hamid MS, et al. Septal Myotomy-Myectomy and Transcoronary Septal Alcohol Ablation in Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy. A Comparison of Clinical, Haemodynamic and Exercise Outcomes. European Heart Journal. 2002; 23: 1617–1624.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[30] Qin JX, Shiota T, Lever HM, Kapadia SR, Sitges M, Rubin DN, et al. Outcome of patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy after percutaneous transluminal septal myocardial ablation and septal myectomy surgery. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2001; 38: 1994–2000.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[31] Nagueh SF, Ommen SR, Lakkis NM, Killip D, Zoghbi WA, Schaff HV, et al. Comparison of ethanol septal reduction therapy with surgical myectomy for the treatment of hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2001; 38: 1701–1706.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar Crossref
[32] Gorenek B, Blomström Lundqvist C, Brugada Terradellas J, Camm AJ, Hindricks G, Huber K, et al. Cardiac arrhythmias in acute coronary syndromes: position paper from the joint EHRA, ACCA, and EAPCI task force. Europace. 2014; 16: 1655–1673.
Cited within: 1Google Scholar Crossref
[33] Singh K, Qutub M, Carson K, Hibbert B, Glover C. A meta analysis of current status of alcohol septal ablation and surgical myectomy for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2016; 88: 107–115.
Cited within: 1Google Scholar Crossref
[34] Ommen SR, Mital S, Burke MA, Day SM, Deswal A, Elliott P, et al. 2020 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2020; 142: e533–e557.
Cited within: 1Google Scholar Crossref
[35] Balt JC, Wijffels MCEF, Boersma LVA, Wever EFD, ten Berg JM. Continuous rhythm monitoring for ventricular arrhythmias after alcohol septal ablation for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Heart. 2014; 100: 1865–1870.
Cited within: 2Google Scholar PubMed Crossref
[36] Maron BJ, Shen W, Link MS, Epstein AE, Almquist AK, Daubert JP, et al. Efficacy of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators for the Prevention of Sudden Death in Patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. New England Journal of Medicine. 2000; 342: 365–373.
Cited within: 2Google Scholar Crossref
[37] McGregor JB, Rahman A, Rosanio S, Ware D, Birnbaum Y, Saeed M. Monomorphic Ventricular Tachycardia: a Late Complication of Percutaneous Alcohol Septal Ablation for Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. The American Journal of the Medical Sciences. 2004; 328: 185–188.
Cited within: 1Google Scholar PubMed Crossref
[38] McLeod CJ, Ommen SR, Ackerman MJ, Weivoda PL, Shen WK, Dearani JA, et al. Surgical septal myectomy decreases the risk for appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator discharge in obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. European Heart Journal. 2007; 28: 2583–2588.
Cited within: 1Google Scholar Crossref
[39] Liebregts M, Vriesendorp PA, Mahmoodi BK, Schinkel AF, Michels M, ten Berg JM. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Long-Term Outcomes After Septal Reduction Therapy in Patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. JACC: Heart Fail. 2015; 3: 896–905.
Cited within: 3Google Scholar PubMed Crossref

Academic Editor

Download

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Academic Editor

Article Metrics

Download

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Abstract

Keywords

References