Our study demonstrated that SBRT was associated with a marked reduction in the burden of VT and ICD interventions (both shocks and ATPs) during the follow-up. SBRT showed the most benefit within three months, however, after six months, all case showed VT recurrence despite a significant reduction in VT burden and ICD therapies. Additionally, our findings showed that SBRT showed an immediate effect in suppressing VT episodes, questioning the necessity of long blanking periods as 12 weeks. There were few recurrences of VT immediate after the procedure. Moreover, it is worth noting that several treatment areas in this series involved the interventricular septum, which is a difficult or near-impossible area to map with the system. In the light of these findings, regarding its immediate and early VT suppressing effects, SBRT seems to be a viable treatment option for critically ill patients suffering from electrical storm with VT inaccessible to localization and treatment with conventional approaches.
SBRT emerged with the promise to deliver ablative radiation to arrhythmogenic substrate noninvasively while lowering procedural risk and limiting injury to normal cardiac tissue nearby. Scarce but growing evidence showed that SBRT demonstrated favorable efficacy outcomes according to a significant reduction in VT episodes with an acceptable safety profile (2, 5, 7, 10, 18). However, the findings on whether SBRT has predominantly early or delayed anti-arrhythmic effects are contradictory. The majority of studies claimed that the time course of the decline in VT attacks after SBRT was acute (2, 5, 7); in contrast, Neuwirth et al and, more recently (10), Kautzner et al indicated that SBRT had predominantly delayed effects after 6–12 months (9). In animal models, SBRT caused dose-dependent myocardial degeneration and subsequent fibrosis progressing from epicardial tissue to full transmurality in the months (19). Ionizing radiation-induced extensive transmural fibrosis, which eliminates zig-zag conduction in surviving fibers and reduces re-entry, has been proposed as the principal anti-arrhythmic mechanism of action (20). However, in most studies, post-radioablation fibrosis is not necessarily transmural while surviving fibers might actually be pro-arrhythmic (21). Notably, in following trials the effects of radioablation seemed to occur immediately after the procedure implying that the reduction in ventricular arrhythmia burden cannot be attributed solely to scar maturation (3, 22). SBRT studies evaluating the radiobiological mechanisms of acute cellular injury after SBRT indicated that cell-to-cell conduction disturbances and cellular membrane instability may have an antiarrhythmic impact before the onset of fibrosis (3). Caspase protein, which is involved in programmed cell death, was found in cells three months after radioablation but not six months later (23). Furthermore, three investigations found a substantial upregulation of the gap junction protein, Connexin 43 as early as two weeks following therapy, which lasted for up to a year (24–26). After radioablation, upregulation of this protein appeared to be functional, with enhanced conduction velocity and decreased repolarization heterogeneity, which is compatible with upregulation of functional gap junctions (24–26). These findings suggest that radioablation's acute anti-arrhythmic impact may involve increased conduction due to upregulation of gap junctions in the target area (3). However, in the recent case report of Benali K. et al, they observed the reduction in bipolar voltages for the myocardium exposed to radiation doses > 15 Gy and suggested that two antiarrhythmic effects of SBRT may coexist: an early impact described by electrical cell reprogramming and a later ablative effect explained by enhanced scar formation (27). Consistent with these findings, we observed the acute suppression of VT episodes beginning with the immediate after the procedure. Accordingly, the histopathological findings of our patient demonstrated massive fibrosis with rare viable myocytes in the SBRT applied area. This adjacent viable myocyte may be pro-arrhythmic and can be accused of delayed VT recurrences occurred in this patient.
From another point of view, technical differences in SBRT may be causing the acute or late effects of SBRT to be more pronounced. Since pre-clinical dose studies have shown that doses > 30Gy to the PTV are required to achieve consistent scar formation at 3–6 months, suboptimal radiation coverage and underdosing of 25 Gy might have led to an initial beneficial effect because of acute edema, but then recurrence of VT in the long term because of the lack of uniform myocardial cell death and/or higher arrhythmic risk of terminally differentiated cells (2).
Although further studies are needed to confirm these results. The requirement for BP and the uniform delivery of 25 Gy regardless of scar size or characteristics requires further investigation. Additionally, it is worth pointing out that the studies speculating predominantly delayed efficacy of SBRT used a different platform as the robotic treatment system CyberKnife delivering the single dose of 25 Gy to the smaller targeted area resulting more concentrating radiation (9, 10). We hypothesized that more focused energy may lead to success more transmural scarring and less tissue-related changes in membrane disturbances resulting in more delayed effects rather than acute impacts. However, there is no information on potential differences about histologic changes in the tissue between different platforms.
The other issue addressed in our study is the necessity and duration of blanking period after SBRT session. Some studies examined the SBRT results after a blanking interval of 2–12 weeks, however the others did not determine a blanking period. Robinson et al. reported that VT episodes were significantly reduced in the first 6 weeks (8). Similarly, Lloyd et al reported that the time course of SBRT action was mainly immediate, with most patients responding in the first 2 weeks after therapy (7). Consistent with these studies, in our study, we assessed the VT episodes starting with the SBRT session specifying the first two weeks. During the first two weeks, we observed ICD shocks in one patient, the rest of the patients were shock-free. The period between 2 weeks to 3 months was the time course when VT episodes occurred the least. We proposed that blanking period is not solely necessary in assessment of SBRT results and if blanking period is planning to apply, it should not exceed 2 weeks. Otherwise, the early effect of SBRT which may be predominantly early could be overlooked.
Clinical implications
Due to the relatively short and noninvasive nature of the treatment, this therapy holds promise as a safe and bail-out choice for advanced heart failure patients with electrical storm who have exhausted for all other options. Because of its capability to administer transmural radiation energy to every ventricular region, SBRT provides the potential to overcome some of the limitations of conventional catheter ablation. Patients who were previously regarded as ineligible for any treatment may now be eligible for a safe and effective choice. However, regarding the high recurrence rate after 6-months of therapy, further investigation is needed on options such as re-administration or dose escalation of SBRT sessions.
Limitations
This is a small, single-center, non-randomized analysis of an investigational therapy. Therefore, to make a statistical analysis or any statistical conclusions cannot be drawn from these small sample size. The study has a retrospective design reviewing prospectively collected data. The long-term safety of this treatment is not known, and only extrapolations from long-term data from the cancer population might be applied at this time. The noninvasive computed tomography (CT)-based surface electrocardiographic imaging has been proposed in initial reports (2, 17) ; however, the availability of ECGI remains limited outside of select institutions and countries (28). Therefore, we used this new modality with the guidance of imaging techniques (such as CT, positron emission tomography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging) integrated by three-dimensional electro-anatomic mapping (EAM) data in the absence of the ECGI. This might be a limitation of this study. Given the small number of patients who qualify for this invasive treatment based on the refractory symptoms, such a trial should be multicenter in design. The results of these very high-risk patients should not be generalized to younger and healthier VT patients. Also, the high rate of recurrence should be considered especially in patients with a long-life expectancy.