4.6 Article

Stereotactic Ablative radiation therapy (SABR) for cardiac arrhythmia: A new therapeutic option?

期刊

RADIOLOGIA MEDICA
卷 126, 期 1, 页码 155-162

出版社

SPRINGER-VERLAG ITALIA SRL
DOI: 10.1007/s11547-020-01218-7

关键词

Cardiac arrhythmia; Cardiac ablation; Radiotherapy; Radiosurgery; SRS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

SABR has been used for the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias based on preclinical and clinical data, demonstrating it as a safe and effective noninvasive treatment approach with a good response time of 2-3 months. The treatment dose is crucial for efficacy, and clinical data support the feasibility, effectiveness, and safety of SABR for refractory ventricular arrhythmias.
Aim Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) is used in non-oncologic indications, recently even for cardiac arrhythmias. Thus, aim of this analysis is to review preclinical, early clinical evidences and future direction of the latter new treatment approach. Method A collection of available data regarding SABR and cardiac arrhythmias was made, by Pubmed research and 2 independent researchers, including preclinical and clinical data. A review of ongoing trials was conducted on ClinicalTrials.gov. Results Preclinical research conducted in animal models showed that a safe and effective noninvasive treatment approach for cardiac arrhythmias could be represented by SABR with a median time of response around 2-3 months. The treatment dose plays a crucial role: the atrioventricular node would seem more radiosensitive than the other cardiac electric zones. Clinical data, such as published case series, case reports and early prospective studies, have already suggested the feasibility, efficacy and safety of SABR (25 Gy in one session) for refractory ventricular arrhythmias. Conclusion Considering the ongoing trials of SABR and new technological improvements in radiotherapy (e.g. hybrid magnetic resonance) and in arrhythmias noninvasive mapping systems, the future analyses will improve the reliability of those preliminary results.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据