Underuse of Catheter Ablation as First-Line Therapy for Supraventricular Tachycardia.

Abstract

BackgroundCatheter ablation (CA) is a safe, effective, cost‐effective technique and may be considered a first‐line strategy for the treatment of symptomatic supraventricular tachycardias (SVT). Despite the high prospect of cure and the recommendations of international guidelines in considering CA as a first‐line treatment strategy, the average time between diagnosis and the procedure may be long. The present study aims to evaluate predictors related to non‐referral for CA as first‐line treatment in patients with SVT.Methods and ResultsThe model was derived from a retrospective cohort of patients with SVT or ventricular pre‐excitation referred for CA in a tertiary center. Clinical and demographical features were used as independent variables and non‐referral for CA as first‐line treatment the dependent variable in a stepwise logistic regression analysis. Among 20 clinical‐demographic variables from 350 patients, 10 were included in initial logistic regression analysis: age, women, presence of pre‐excitation on ECG, palpitation, dyspnea and chest discomfort, number of antiarrhythmic drugs before ablation, number of concomitant symptoms, symptoms’ duration and evaluations in the emergency room due to SVT. After multivariable adjusted analysis, age (odds ratio [OR], 1.2; 95% CI 1.01–1.32; P=0.04), chest discomfort during supraventricular tachycardia (OR, 2.7; CI 1.6–4.7; P<0.001) and number of antiarrhythmic drugs before ablation (OR, 1.8; CI 1.4–2.3; P<0.001) showed a positive independent association for non‐referral for CA as SVT first‐line treatment.ConclusionsThe independent predictors of non‐referral for CA as first‐line treatment in our logistic regression analysis indicate the existence of biases in the decision‐making process in the referral process of patients who would benefit the most from catheter ablation. They very likely suggest a skewed medical decision‐making process leading to catheter ablation underuse.