OBJECTIVES: This study attempted to determine the long-term outcome of verapamil-sensitive sustained left ventricular tachycardia in patients without apparent structural heart disease. BACKGROUND: Several types of idiopathic ventricular tachycardia have been reported, and their clinical, electrophysiologic and electropharmacologic characteristics are different. It is possible that the prognosis of each type of ventricular tachycardia might also be different. METHODS: We studied mortality and morbidity in 37 consecutive patients (27 male, 10 female; mean [+/- SD] age 33 +/- 14 years) with verapamil-sensitive sustained left ventricular tachycardia who had no apparent structural heart disease. Patients were followed up for 1 to 13 years (mean 5.8). Verapamil repeatedly terminated ventricular tachycardia in all patients. Ventricular tachycardia originated from the inferior and inferoseptal regions of the left ventricle in 33 patients and the superior and superioseptal regions in 4. Severity of ventricular tachycardia was classified according to the extent to which symptoms limited daily activities. Ventricular tachycardia was mild (minimal limitation) in 14 patients, moderate (some limitation) in 17 and severe (severe limitation) in 6. RESULTS: Fourteen patients with mild ventricular tachycardia were followed up without any drug therapy, and the ventricular tachycardia remained mild in all patients. Antiarrhythmic therapy was initiated empirically in the 23 patients with moderate and severe ventricular tachycardia (verapamil in 20, propranolol in 2, digoxin in 1). Moderate ventricular tachycardia became mild ventricular tachycardia after drug therapy in all patients, but the six patients with severe ventricular tachycardia showed no improvement. The six patients with severe ventricular tachycardia had nonpharmacologic therapy (cryosurgery in one, catheter ablation in four, antitachycardia pacing device in one). During the follow-up period, all patients remained alive except for one who died suddenly after implantation of an antitachycardia pacing device. CONCLUSIONS: 1) The long-term prognosis of verapamil-sensitive sustained left ventricular tachycardia in patients without apparent structural heart disease is good. 2) Verapamil is the drug of choice for alleviating symptoms, but nonpharmacologic therapy is necessary in some patients.
OBJECTIVES: This study attempted to determine the long-term outcome of verapamil-sensitive sustained left ventricular tachycardia in patients without apparent structural heart disease. BACKGROUND: Several types of idiopathic ventricular tachycardia have been reported, and their clinical, electrophysiologic and electropharmacologic characteristics are different. It is possible that the prognosis of each type of ventricular tachycardia might also be different. METHODS: We studied mortality and morbidity in 37 consecutive patients (27 male, 10 female; mean [+/- SD] age 33 +/- 14 years) with verapamil-sensitive sustained left ventricular tachycardia who had no apparent structural heart disease. Patients were followed up for 1 to 13 years (mean 5.8). Verapamil repeatedly terminated ventricular tachycardia in all patients. Ventricular tachycardia originated from the inferior and inferoseptal regions of the left ventricle in 33 patients and the superior and superioseptal regions in 4. Severity of ventricular tachycardia was classified according to the extent to which symptoms limited daily activities. Ventricular tachycardia was mild (minimal limitation) in 14 patients, moderate (some limitation) in 17 and severe (severe limitation) in 6. RESULTS: Fourteen patients with mild ventricular tachycardia were followed up without any drug therapy, and the ventricular tachycardia remained mild in all patients. Antiarrhythmic therapy was initiated empirically in the 23 patients with moderate and severe ventricular tachycardia (verapamil in 20, propranolol in 2, digoxin in 1). Moderate ventricular tachycardia became mild ventricular tachycardia after drug therapy in all patients, but the six patients with severe ventricular tachycardia showed no improvement. The six patients with severe ventricular tachycardia had nonpharmacologic therapy (cryosurgery in one, catheter ablation in four, antitachycardia pacing device in one). During the follow-up period, all patients remained alive except for one who died suddenly after implantation of an antitachycardia pacing device. CONCLUSIONS: 1) The long-term prognosis of verapamil-sensitive sustained left ventricular tachycardia in patients without apparent structural heart disease is good. 2) Verapamil is the drug of choice for alleviating symptoms, but nonpharmacologic therapy is necessary in some patients.