AIMS: Catheter ablation (CA) has become the treatment of choice for regular supraventricular tachycardia (SVT). The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the current clinical results in a large single centre are as good as success rates quoted to patients from published trials and national cardiology society websites. METHODS AND RESULTS: We recorded and analysed prospectively the acute and follow-up (FU) results of all CA procedures performed for SVT at our institution over a 2-year period. We compared our results with the success rates of 90-98% for CA quoted in the literature. We performed a total of 547 CA at our institution over 2 years, of which 389 (71%) were for regular SVT. Of these, 71 procedures (18%) were redo procedures. The overall acute procedural success rate was 96.1% (374/389). Follow-up data were available for 367 of 389 (94.3%) procedures. The overall 6-week success rate varied between 74.7 and 91.3% depending on the SVT type (average 83.9%). The FU success rates were lower for redo procedures (47/66, 71.2%) when compared with first ablation (de novo) procedures (261/301, 86.7%), P = 0.003. CONCLUSION: Published success rates are much better than current success rates in a large single centre. It is possible that the information regarding outcome given to patients during the consent process is not accurate.
AIMS: Catheter ablation (CA) has become the treatment of choice for regular supraventricular tachycardia (SVT). The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the current clinical results in a large single centre are as good as success rates quoted to patients from published trials and national cardiology society websites. METHODS AND RESULTS: We recorded and analysed prospectively the acute and follow-up (FU) results of all CA procedures performed for SVT at our institution over a 2-year period. We compared our results with the success rates of 90-98% for CA quoted in the literature. We performed a total of 547 CA at our institution over 2 years, of which 389 (71%) were for regular SVT. Of these, 71 procedures (18%) were redo procedures. The overall acute procedural success rate was 96.1% (374/389). Follow-up data were available for 367 of 389 (94.3%) procedures. The overall 6-week success rate varied between 74.7 and 91.3% depending on the SVT type (average 83.9%). The FU success rates were lower for redo procedures (47/66, 71.2%) when compared with first ablation (de novo) procedures (261/301, 86.7%), P = 0.003. CONCLUSION: Published success rates are much better than current success rates in a large single centre. It is possible that the information regarding outcome given to patients during the consent process is not accurate.