Abstract Body (Do not enter title and authors here): Introduction:
Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a life-threatening arrhythmia commonly associated with structural heart disease. Catheter ablation (CA) and antiarrhythmic drug therapy (AAD) are both used for VT management, but their comparative efficacy and safety remain uncertain. This meta-analysis evaluates outcomes from randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing CA and AAD in VT patients.

Methods:
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. RCTs comparing CA with AAD for VT treatment were identified through database searches. Outcomes included VT recurrence, appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks, VT storm, heart failure hospitalization, and all-cause mortality. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random effects model.

Results:
Four RCTs with 709 patients were included. There was no statistically significant difference between CA and AAD in all-cause mortality (RR 0.9, 95% CI: 0.65–1.23, p=0.5), VT recurrence (RR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.56–1.35, p=0.54), or VT storm (RR 0.89, 95% CI: 0.63–1.26, p=0.51). Additionally, no statistically significant difference noted in reducing appropriate ICD shocks (RR 0.74, 95% CI: 0.54–1.02, p=0.07) and heart failure hospitalizations (RR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.36–1.28, p=0.23).

Conclusions:
There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality, VT recurrence, VT storm, ICD shocks and heart failure hospitalizations between CA and AAD. Further research is needed including larger samples and longer-term follow up to confirm these results.