Bayesian analysis of the substrate ablation vs. antiarrhythmic drug therapy for symptomatic ventricular tachycardia trial

[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-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Ávila, Pablo, Berruezo, Antonio, Jiménez Candil, Francisco Javier, Tercedor, Luis, Calvo, David, Arribas, Fernando, Fernández-Portales, Javier, Merino, José Luis, Hernández Madrid, Antonio, Fernández-Avilés, Francisco, Arenal, Ángel
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2023
País:España
Institución:Universidad de Salamanca (USAL)
Repositorio:GREDOS. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Salamanca
OAI Identifier:oai:gredos.usal.es:10366/161015
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/10366/161015
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Anti-arrhythmic drugs
Bayesian analysis
Catheter ablation
Ventricular tachycardia
Cardiomyopathies
Anti-Arrhythmia Agents
Treatment Outcome
Humans
Defibrillators
Bayes Theorem
Tachycardia
Myocardial Ischemia
Catheter Ablation
isquemia miocárdica
desfibriladores
resultado del tratamiento
humanos
teorema de Bayes
taquicardia
antiarrítmicos
ablación por catéter
miocardiopatías
Descripción
Sumario:[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.