Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41280538›Full record

ArticleHeart rhythm O22025

Target delineation workflow and outcomes of stereotactic cardiac radioablation.

Muhammad R Afzal, Emile G Daoud, Mahmoud Gomaa, Toshimasa Okabe, Salvatore J Savona, Natee Sirinvaravong, Matthew Tong, Mahmoud Houmsse, Ralph S Augostini, Steven J Kalbfleisch and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Muhammad R AfzalSection of Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Emile G DaoudSection of Electrophysiology, TriHealth Heart & Vascular Institute, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Mahmoud GomaaSection of Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Toshimasa OkabeSection of Electrophysiology, Heart and Vascular Services, Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, Washington.
Salvatore J SavonaSection of Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Natee SirinvaravongSection of Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Matthew TongSection of Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Mahmoud HoumsseSection of Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Ralph S AugostiniSection of Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Steven J KalbfleischSection of Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Eric MillerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, James Cancer Center, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Evan ThomasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, James Cancer Center, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Terence M WilliamsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California.
Michael WeldonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, James Cancer Center, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
John D HummelSection of Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Jeremy BrownsteinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, James Cancer Center, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is an emerging modality for the treatment of ventricular tachycardia (VT). The workflow for delineation of the SBRT target is evolving. Objective: This project describes the procedural workflow and outcomes of SBRT for VT. Methods: The primary indication for SBRT was recurrent VT despite maximal contemporary treatment. Target delineation for SBRT involved combining imaging and electrophysiological data. VT burden, defined as the number of sustained VT episodes per month, was compared as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes assessed included reduction of antitachycardia pacing and defibrillator shock episodes and reduction in the number of antiarrhythmic drugs per patient during follow-up. Results: Workup for VT target delineation and radiation delivery was conducted in 25 patients receiving 27 SBRT procedures. VT management prior to SBRT consideration included ≥2 catheter ablations in 22 (88%) and surgical sympathectomy in 7 patients (28%). Of the 27 performed cases, SBRT target delineation incorporated electrocardiogram of clinical VT in 16 (59%), at least 2 noninvasive imaging modalities to assess scar in 24 (89%), and invasive electroanatomic mapping in 25 (93%). Among 16 patients with a complete 6-month follow-up, the reduction of VT burden per month was 81% ( Conclusion: In patients with recurrent VT despite maximal contemporary antiarrhythmic therapies, SBRT offers a safe alternative once the target is adequately delineated by combining imaging and electrophysiological data.

Indexed as

ArrhythmiasCardiac imagingElectroanatomic mappingRadiation ablationVentricular scarVentricular tachycardia

Identifiers

PMID41280538
PMCPMC12635712

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.