Abstract
Cardiac stereotactic body radiation therapy (cSBRT) is a non-invasive treatment modality that has been recently reported as an effective treatment for ventricular arrhythmias refractory to medical therapy and catheter ablation. The approach leverages tools developed and refined in radiation oncology, where experience has been accumulated in the treatment of a wide variety of malignant conditions. However, important differences exist between rapidly dividing malignant tumor cells and fully differentiated myocytes in pathologically remodeled ventricular myocardium, which represent the respective radiation targets. Despite its initial success, little is known about the radiobiology of the anti-arrhythmic effect cSBRT. Pre-clinical data indicates a late fibrotic effect of that appears between 3 and 4 months following cSBRT, which may result in conduction slowing and block. However, there is clear clinical evidence of an anti-arrhythmic effect of cSBRT that precedes the appearance of radiation induced fibrosis for which the mechanism is unclear. In addition, the data to date suggests that even the late anti-arrhythmic effect of cSBRT is not fully attributable to radiation.-induced fibrosis. Pre-clinical data has identified upregulation of proteins expected to result in both increased cell-to-cell coupling and excitability in the early post cSBRT period and demonstrated an associated increase in myocardial conduction velocity. These observations indicate a complex response to radiotherapy and highlight the lack of clarity regarding the different stages of the anti-arrhythmic mechanism of cSBRT. It may be speculated that in the future cSBRT therapy could be planned to deliver both early and late radiation effects titrated to optimize the combined anti-arrhythmic efficacy of the treatment. In addition to these outstanding mechanistic questions, the optimal patient selection, radiation modality, radiation dose and treatment planning strategy are currently being investigated. In this review, we consider the structural and functional effect of radiation on myocardium and the possible anti-arrhythmic mechanisms of cSBRT. Review of the published data highlights the exciting prospects for the development of knowledge and understanding in this area in which so many outstanding questions exist.
Introduction
The use of single fraction, high dose ionizing radiation therapy (RT) in the form cardiac-stereotactic body radiation therapy (cSBRT) has recently been described as a treatment for patients with refractory ventricular arrhythmias (VA). The clinical experience has been reviewed previously () and encouraging results have been reported following the use of cSBRT to treat patients in whom control of VA could not be achieved with conventional therapies. While the clinical response has been encouraging, a precise understanding of the anti-arrhythmic mechanism of cSBRT remains incomplete. A number of observations have been consistently reported that indicate a complex response of myocardium to cSBRT and identify areas in which further work will be required to reach a comprehensive understanding of the mode of action of cSBRT.
Conventional radio-frequency (RF) cardiac ablation comprises thermal injury to myocytes resulting in acute coagulative necrosis and associated with acute cell death and consequent myocardial conduction block (). Other catheter based ablation energies are also associated with acute cell death and secondary conduction block (, ). RT, on the other hand, is not expected to be, and has not typically been demonstrated to be, associated with acute formation of conduction block. Despite this, delivery of cSBRT has been successfully used to achieve acute (within 1 day), as well as chronic, suppression of incessant ventricular arrhythmias (). This raises the question as to how cSBRT results in early arrhythmia suppression and indicates that in contrast to catheter-based ablation technology, other anti-arrhythmic mechanisms may be important. Following cSBRT at doses that have been delivered clinically, development of fibrosis in the timeframe of months following cSBRT has been reported, at which point ongoing suppression of ventricular arrhythmias with cSBRT has also been reported. This suggests that different mechanisms may be responsible for the acute and chronic phases of the myocardial response to cSBRT. In order to understand how cSBRT may exert its anti-arrhythmic effect, an understanding of the tissue response to RT is paramount. In this review, recent experimental and clinical data relating to the effect of RT on myocardium at different time points following RT exposure is reviewed, and the experimental data regarding the functional response of various myocardial structures is considered. Review of this data raises more questions than it provides answers, reflecting the current status of knowledge in this field. This identifies compelling opportunities for future research to develop our understanding of the mechanisms underlying this promising non-invasive treatment strategy in the field of arrhythmia management.
Cellular response to ionizing radiation
Radiation induced cellular changes have been studied widely in the field of oncology. The cellular response to radiation has typically been considered with regard to differentiating cells, and interruption of the cell cycle is an important mechanism through which RT affects malignant cells. This represents an important distinction from the situation when RT is used to treat arrhythmias, in which case it is understood that fully differentiated cells, either anatomically selected on the basis of established ablation strategies (for example atrio-ventricular node (AVN), cavo-tricuspid isthmus (CTI) or pulmonary vein (PV) ostia) or abnormal myocardial substrate in the context of ventricular arrhythmias, are targeted. Despite this key difference, there is a wealth of literature relating to the effect of radiation on cells, much of which remains relevant when considering how RT may affect myocardial tissue. The molecular mechanisms underlying radiation induced cellular death have been recently reviewed (). A number of responses to RT are recognized, including mitotic catastrophe and cell death, apoptosis, necrosis, cellular senescence and autophagy. Broadly, cell death may be considered as regulated (including apoptosis and other less common forms of regulated cell death) or unregulated (necrosis). Cellular senescence describes a condition of permanent cell cycle arrest, and has been associated with a characteristic senescence associated secretory phenotype (SASP) (). The role of cellular senescence in already cell-cycle arrested cardiomyocytes is incompletely defined, but senescence and the SASP represent relatively recently appreciated contributors to the development of chronic cardiac conditions, in particular those associated with increasing age, and senescence may comprise part of the myocardial response to RT. Mitotic death may be less relevant to the myocardial response to RT than other forms of cell. Apoptosis is a highly regulated process and is associated with characteristic morphologic and molecular features. Specifically, cellular markers may identify activation of apoptotic cellular death pathways. Caspase-3 represents a common marker of multiple pathways of activation of apoptotic cell death (). In contrast to apoptosis, necrosis represents an unregulated form of cell death that may occur in response to RT induced cellular and micro-environment changes. Necrotic tissue has characteristic morphological features including increased cellular volume, membrane rupture and release of intracellular contents (). In addition to effecting direct cellular damage, RT may induce secondary cell death. Experimental data from the cancer literature indicates that doses of greater than 10Gy induce severe vascular damage within tumors resulting in hypoperfusion and likely secondary cell death through ischemia, effects which have been observed as early as 24 hours following irradiation (). It is recognized that neovascularization within tumors renders the blood supply more radiosensitive than surrounding normal tissue (). RT induced vasculitis represents a potential mechanism through which cSBRT may mediate an ablative effect in myocardium. Secondary effects of RT exposure may also include augmentation of an immune response, which has been suggested in tumor biology. Whether or not a secondary immune response to cSBRT is relevant remains uncertain. It is plausible that there would exist differences in the radiosensitivity of pathological myocardial substrate when compared to adjacent healthy tissue, although evidence to demonstrate this has not been established. Data from experimental and clinical studies following cSBRT have identified features indicating a role for necrosis, apoptosis and vascular injury in the myocardial response to cSBRT and are discussed below.
Ionizing radiation induced cardiovascular disease
Data from patients undergoing thoracic irradiation for malignancy established the potential for RT to cause cardiovascular damage (). RT may cause early toxicity such as pericardial inflammation or delayed toxicity affecting the pericardium, valves, conduction system or myocardium (). The mechanisms underlying RT induced cardiovascular disease (CVD) are relevant when considering the mechanism through which cSBRT may mediate an ablative or anti-arrhythmic effect. Mechanisms through which RT may induce CVD include endothelial damage, through direct DNA damage and oxidative stress, which may result in a greater risk of atherosclerotic plaque rupture. Microvascular obstruction may also occur, which contributes to the development of capillary loss, ischemia, myocardial cell death and subsequent myocardial fibrosis. In addition to promoting vascular effects with a secondary impact on myocardium, direct effects on the myocardium are recognized. Oxidative stress on the cell membrane following RT exposure is a key mechanism underlying the development of myocardial inflammation and subsequent progression to fibrosis, which most commonly manifests as restrictive cardiomyopathy, likely reflecting progressive myocardial fibrosis (). The generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) following RT affects mitochondrial function, which represent the primary cellular site of oxidative metabolism (). RT induced mitochondrial dysfunction promote cellular aging and apoptosis (). RT induced mitochondrial dysfunction may promote the development of myocardial cellular senescence, and the associated senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) (). The impact of RT in promoting the SASP in the heart remains incompletely characterized, is likely to be complex and specific to different cell types within the myocardium, but is likely to be relevant to the myocardial response to RT. The QUANTEC project has sought to evaluate the current state of knowledge of the biologic effect of radiation doses on normal tissue () and provided data specifically relevant to cardiac toxicity (). Although the data from the oncologic experience reflects heterogeneous radiation doses and dosing regimes, which in general have been delivered with the aim of minimizing the myocardial dose, the mechanism for myocardial toxicity has been consistently identified as the late development of myocardial fibrosis. This appears to be mediated through vascular as well as direct myocardial effects following an initial inflammatory response to RT.
Effect of cardiac stereotactic body radiation therapy on myocardial tissue
As the therapeutic potential for cSBRT in the treatment of arrhythmias has become apparent, there has been greater interest in the mechanisms by which high-dose radiation affects myocardium. While data collected from the collateral irradiation of myocardium in cancer patients provides an invaluable foundation for the study of the myocardial response to RT, this data has been collected from studies in which the cardiac dose has been deliberately minimized. More recently, pre-clinical studies and a smaller number of clinical reports have attempted to assess the acute and chronic effect of high-dose single fraction cSBRT on different heart structures. These data are also confounded by the use of different radiation sources and modes of delivery, however the reports are considered according to the time course at which tissue and electrophysiologic function was assessed following irradiation. Radiation sources are generally described as γ-radiation, β-radiation, proton beam and heavy (Carbon) ion beam. It is appreciated that the different forms of radiation have different properties and different energies meaning that their effects on tissue are not comparable but the purpose is to review patterns of damage to cardiac tissue and learn from this.
Acute effect of cSBRT on myocardium
A small number of studies have considered the ability of RT to induce acute effects on myocardium, which may be considered as effects seen within hours of irradiation. Lehmann et al. applied heavy ion radiation to the atrio-ventricular node of Langendorff-perfused porcine hearts (). No acute AV conduction disturbance followed 70Gy irradiation, AV prolongation (in a heart demonstrating pre-existing Mobitz II second degree AV block) followed 90Gy irradiation, and complete AV block followed 160Gy irradiation (more than seven times the most commonly reported cSBRT dose). In this study no macroscopically visible damage was seen following irradiation and histological analysis did not reveal evidence of apoptosis or necrosis, in addition there was no evidence of increased expression of protein markers of apoptosis in the irradiated area. Hypereosinophilia was noted in the in the field irradiated with 160 Gy. Phosphorylated histone 2AX (a marker of double stranded DNA damage) was strongly positive in the irradiated region. Pérez-Castellano et al. delivered β-radiation (high-energy electrons) at a dose of 60Gy through a balloon catheter within the pulmonary vein (PV) trunk of in-vivo porcine hearts (). Acute histological assessment of the acutely irradiated PV sleeve demonstrated endothelial damage, disruption of the elastic intima and myocardial sleeve necrosis. PV isolation was not achieved in this experiment. An example of the acute effects of β-radiation in this experiment is shown in Figure 1 ().
Figure 1
These data indicate that acute conduction block within the specialized conduction system may be achieved with extremely high doses of heavy ion radiation, and that this was achieved without evidence of tissue necrosis or apoptosis. In-vivo, high dose β-radiation was associated with acute endothelial damage and myocardial necrosis, without resulting in acute conduction disturbance across the irradiated atrio-venous junction. These data do indicate an important difference between the response of tissue to RT compared to that of RF energy, following which electrophysiologic effects on both myocardial tissue and specialized conduction system tissue are seen acutely.
Chronic effect of cSBRT on myocardium
Sharma et al. considered the impact of γ-irradiation on porcine atrial structures (
Amino et al. studied the effect of heavy ion irradiation on recently infarcted leporine ventricular myocardium (
At 3 months following 25–55Gy γ-irradiation of the porcine AV node, macroscopically visible fibrosis was evident and corresponding dense fibrosis evident microscopically, with lesion volume demonstrating a strong radiation dose-response relationship (
Following 60Gy β-radiation delivery 2–3 months prior in a porcine atrial model, mild neointimal hyperplasia was seen, the elastic intima was thickened and fibrosis of the PV sleeve was seen (
In 25–50Gy β-radiation delivered via an intra-cardiac catheter created bidirectional CTI conduction block in a canine model (
Blanck et al. undertook a dose-finding study to assess the effect of 17.5–35Gy doses at 6 months following γ-irradiation of porcine right superior PV antrum (
Suzuki et al. considered the time course of the development of proton beam induced radiation changes in healthy porcine ventricular myocardium (
Following heavy ion beam irradiation with 40Gy radiation, previously healthy porcine ventricular tissue was examined at 3 and 6 months. Targeted myocardium demonstrated hemorrhage, inflammation and early fibrosis at 3 months. In addition, caspase-3, a marker of cellular apoptosis, was present at 3 months. At 6 months, there was less marked hemorrhage and inflammation with marked fibrosis and myocyte disarray, and markers for caspase-3 were negative by this point (
Figure 2

(Reproduced from Lehmann et al. (
Chang et al. assessed canine left atrial tissue at 6-weeks and 4-months following 33Gy γ-radiation delivered to a target area encompassing the pulmonary veins and posterior left atrial wall (
Dose dependent upregulation of Cx43 was demonstrated up to a year following heavy ion irradiation using doses between 10–15Gy in healthy leporine ventricular myocardium (but not at 5Gy doses), without evidence of myocardial fibrosis (
Clinical data
Data from clinical specimens has been reported from a small number of cases at various time points following RT exposure. In all cases, the substrate has been targeted with 25Gy γ-radiation. In the first series of clinical cSBRT, one patient died from a stroke 3 weeks post cSBRT and histological analysis of this patient's heart was presented (
Figure 3

(Reproduced with permission from Kautzner et al. (
Functional effect of cSBRT
A number of studies have assessed the feasibility of using radiation to achieve conduction block in the specialized conduction system of the heart, with the AV node commonly chosen as the target. Acute AV conduction block in Langendorff perfused porcine hearts was induced with very high dose heavy ion beam irradiation (
Other studies have considered the possibility of using external radiation to target common atrial locations that would be relevant to treating common atrial arrhythmias. 40Gy γ-irradiation of the CTI in a porcine model was associated with bidirectional conduction block at 30-days post irradiation, while conduction block was not observed with doses of 25Gy. At other dose levels conduction slowing across the CTI was demonstrated without conduction block (
β-radiation at a dose of 60Gy through a balloon catheter within the pulmonary vein (PV) trunk resulted in diminished PV amplitude and elevated pacing threshold without conduction block in or out of the vein at 81 days post irradiation (
At 6 months following 17.5–35Gy γ-irradiation of the right superior PV, pulmonary vein isolation was not achieved in a porcine model, likely due to incomplete circumferential transmural ablation in this study (
Previously healthy porcine ventricular myocardium underwent in-vivo proton beam irradiation and systolic function was assessed over time (
Data from a small number of patients has been reported assessing surface ECG data from patients undergoing cSBRT. Zhang et al. report a non-significant trend toward QRS shortening among 19 patients who underwent cSBRT, including 4 of whom demonstrated a robust 25ms shortening of the QRS duration at 6-weeks post cSBRT (
cSBRT in experimental models of ventricular substrate
In a leporine model of recent MI, heavy ion beam irradiation resulted in changes in ventricular conduction velocity in both control tissue and in the peri-infarct border zone at 2 weeks following irradiation. These may be summarized as demonstrating an increase in transverse CV following irradiation in both control and peri-infarct tissue, and in addition an increase in longitudinal CV in peri-infarct tissue, reversing the CV slowing seen in peri-infarct tissue following MI without irradiation. Therefore, as well affecting total activation time of the ventricle, irradiation affected the ventricular anisotropic conduction properties in both healthy and peri-infarct tissue. In addition, refractoriness was prolonged in healthy tissue following irradiation. In this study, irradiation resulted in an overall decrease in the susceptibility to inducible ventricular arrhythmias (
In a canine model of recent MI, 15Gy of heavy ion beam irradiation resulted in reversal of MI-induced diminished expression of Cx43 seen in the peri-infarct border zone at 1 year. Of note, this was also associated with reduced surface ECG evidence of delayed ventricular activation, reduced susceptibility to induced ventricular arrhythmias as well as greater recovery of LV systolic function (as assessed by echocardiographic fractional shortening) without effect on diastolic function at 1 year post irradiation (
At 4 weeks following experimental MI, proton beam irradiation was applied to porcine ventricular tissue (targeting CMR identified infarct) at doses of 30–40Gy (
Zhang et al. considered the early effects of RT on conduction velocity (
Figure 4

Reproduced from Zhang et al. (
Conclusion
cSBRT represents a promising non-invasive modality that has recently emerged for the treatment of refractory VA. The myocardial response to RT is complex and likely to be cell-type specific. In addition, amongst similar cell types, the radio-sensitivity of tissue may be different in healthy vs. unhealthy myocardium. Acute and sub-acute cellular changes following cSBRT including those of cellular necrosis and apoptosis have been identified in experimental and clinical reports. Vascular effects, including vasculitis and capillary thrombosis, as well as acute mitochondrial damage have been reported in the acute phase following cSBRT. These changes precede the development of myocardial fibrosis, which has most commonly been seen beyond 3 months from cSBRT. Furthermore, in several clinical reports, no discernible histopathological changes were identified in the treated myocardium despite a reduction in the arrhythmia burden of the patients following cSBRT. The cancer community are increasingly aware of radiation induced damage to normal tissue in patients receiving RT for cancers; especially dose to cardiac substructures. There are many ongoing pre-clinical and clinical studies in this area providing much more data which may give further useful insights into mechanisms of damage.
In experimental conditions, acute conduction block within specialized conduction tissue may be achieved, in some cases with doses well in excess of those that have been used to achieve arrhythmia suppression clinically. In contrast to the mechanism through which arrhythmia suppression is achieved with traditional catheter-based technologies, acute conduction block does not appear to be the mechanism underlying the early anti-arrhythmic of cSBRT. Experimental studies have indicated the possibility of acute increases in CV in experimental models of early MI and suggested that RT induced electrical reprogramming of myocardial gap junction and sodium channel expression may persist up to a year after RT exposure. The relevance of these observations to the early, and indeed late, anti-arrhythmic effects of cSBRT remain uncertain but represent an intriguing area for future investigation. Clinical data assessing the CV in human myocardium following cSBRT has not been reported. The role of late-stage fibrosis in the homogenization of arrhythmogenic myocardial substrate may represent a more familiar mechanism through which arrhythmias are inhibited, but even data confirming this are so far limited.
The structural and functional myocardial response to RT exposure through cSBRT is likely to be specific to the cell type targeted, the dose and radiation source of the RT delivered and the time-point at which tissue is assessed. There exists a large knowledge gap regarding many of the topics discussed in this review which represents an exciting opportunity for future research. As experience grows with the wider use of cSBRT, a greater understanding of the tissue response will likely develop and this may contribute to further insights into the mechanisms through which cSBRT provides acute and chronic arrhythmia suppression. In the future, with the benefit of a greater understanding of the many outstanding issues discussed in this review, it is envisaged that cSBRT therapy could be planned to optimally titrate both early and late radiation effects to optimize the combined anti-arrhythmic efficacy of the treatment, minimize radiation associated toxicity and thus achieve the best patient outcomes.
Funding
This research was funded in whole, or in part, by the Wellcome Trust (WT 203148/Z/16/Z). For the purpose of open access, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Statements
Author contributions
First draft created by JW. Critical review and significant contributions from PZ, SA, SN, MO'N, and CR. All authors contributed to the manuscript submitted and final draft reviewed, and approved.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1.
van der ReeMHBlanckOLimpensJLeeCHBalgobindBVDielemanEMTet al. Cardiac radioablation—A systematic review. Heart Rhythm. (2020) 17:1381–92. 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.03.013
2.
SandhuANguyenDT. Forging ahead: Update on radiofrequency ablation technology and techniques. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. (2020) 31:360–9. 10.1111/jce.14317
3.
MaanAKoruthJ. Pulsed field ablation: a new paradigm for catheter ablation of arrhythmias. Current Cardiology Reports. (2022) 24:103–8. 10.1007/s11886-021-01630-z
4.
AndradeJGDubucMGuerraPGMacLeLMondésertBRivardLet al. The biophysics and biomechanics of cryoballoon ablation. PACE - Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. (2012) 35:1162–8. 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2012.03436.x
5.
WhitakerJMakRHZeiPC. Non-invasive ablation of arrhythmias with stereotactic ablative radiotherapy. Trends Cardiov Med. (2021) 32:287–296. 10.1016/j.tcm.2021.04.008
6.
SiaJSzmydRHauEGeeHE. Molecular mechanisms of radiation-induced cancer cell death: a primer. Front Cell Develop Biol. (2020) 8:41. 10.3389/fcell.2020.00041
7.
MehdizadehMAguilarMThorinEFerbeyreGNattelS. The role of cellular senescence in disease: basic biology and clinical relevance. Nat Rev Cardiol Nat Res. (2022) 19:250–64. 10.1038/s41569-021-00624-2
8.
ParkHJGriffinRJHuiSLevittSHSongCW. Radiation-induced vascular damage in tumors: Implications of vascular damage in ablative hypofractionated radiotherapy (SBRT and SRS). Radiat Res. (2012) 177:311–27. 10.1667/RR2773.1
9.
SongCWGlatsteinEMarksLBEmamiBGrimmJSperdutoPWet al. Biological Principles of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) and Stereotactic Radiation Surgery (SRS): Indirect Cell Death. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. (2021) 110:21–34. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.02.047
10.
KoutroumpakisEDeswalAYusufSWAbeJNeadKTPotterASet al. Radiation-induced cardiovascular disease: mechanisms, prevention, and treatment. Curr Oncol Reports. (2022) 34:543–53. 10.1007/s11912-022-01238-8
11.
KoutroumpakisEPalaskasNLLinSHAbeJILiaoZBanchsJet al. Modern radiotherapy and risk of cardiotoxicity. Chemotherapy. (2020) 65:65–76. 10.1159/000510573
12.
Belzile-DugasEEisenbergMJ. Radiation-induced cardiovascular disease: Review of an underrecognized pathology. J Am Heart Assoc. (2021) 10:e021686. 10.1161/JAHA.121.021686
13.
SpitzDRAzzamEILiJJGiusD. Metabolic oxidation/reduction reactions and cellular responses to ionizing radiation: A unifying concept in stress response biology. Cancer Metast Rev. (2004) 23:311–22. 10.1023/B:CANC.0000031769.14728.bc
14.
BentzenSMConstineLSDeasyJOEisbruchAJacksonAMarksLBet al. Quantitative analyses of normal tissue effects in the clinic (QUANTEC): an introduction to the scientific issues. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. (2010) 76:S3–9. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.09.040
15.
LehmannHIRichterDProkeschHGraeffCPrallMSimonielloPet al. Atrioventricular node ablation in langendorff-perfused porcine hearts using carbon ion particle therapy. Circulation. (2015) 8:429–38. 10.1161/CIRCEP.114.002436
16.
Pérez-CastellanoNVillacastínJAragoncilloPFantidisPSabatéMGarcía-TorrentMJet al. Pathological effects of pulmonary vein beta-radiation in a swine model. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. (2006) 17:662–9. 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2006.00462.x
17.
SharmaAWongDWeidlichGFogartyTJackASumanaweeraTet al. Noninvasive stereotactic radiosurgery (CyberHeart) for creation of ablation lesions in the atrium. Heart Rhythm. (2010) 7:802–10. 10.1016/j.hrthm.2010.02.010
18.
AminoMYoshiokaKTanabeTTanakaEMoriHFurusawaYet al. Heavy ion radiation up-regulates Cx43 and ameliorates arrhythmogenic substrates in hearts after myocardial infarction. Cardiovasc Res. (2006) 72:412–21. 10.1016/j.cardiores.2006.09.010
19.
AminoMYoshiokaKFujibayashiDHashidaTFurusawaYZarebaWet al. Year-long upregulation of connexin43 in rabbit hearts by heavy ion irradiation. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. (2010) 298:1014–21. 10.1152/ajpheart.00160.2009
20.
LehmannHIDeisherAJTakamiMKruseJJSongLAndersonSEet al. External Arrhythmia Ablation Using Photon Beams: ablation of the atrioventricular junction in an intact animal model. Circulation. (2017) 10:e004304. 10.1161/CIRCEP.116.004304
21.
RefaatMMBalloutJAZakkaPHotaitMFeghaliKAGheidaIAet al. Swine atrioventricular node ablation using stereotactic radiosurgery: Methods and in vivo feasibility investigation for catheter-free ablation of cardiac arrhythmias. J Am Heart Assoc. (2017) 6:e007193. 10.1161/JAHA.117.007193
22.
SuzukiADeisherAJRettmannMELehmannHIHohmannSWangSet al. Catheter-free arrhythmia ablation using scanned proton beams: Electrophysiologic outcomes, biophysics, and characterization of lesion formation in a porcine model. Circulation. (2020) 13:e008838. 10.1161/CIRCEP.120.008838
23.
GuerraPGTalajicMThibaultBDubucMRoyDMadeLet al. β-radiation for the creation of linear lesions in the canine atrium. Circulation. (2004) 110:911–4. 10.1161/01.CIR.0000139865.39885.03
24.
BlanckOBodeFGebhardMHunoldPBrandtSBruderRet al. Dose-escalation study for cardiac radiosurgery in a porcine model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. (2014) 89:590–8. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.02.036
25.
BodeFBlanckOGebhardMHunoldPGrossherrMBrandtSet al. Pulmonary vein isolation by radiosurgery: Implications for non-invasive treatment of atrial fibrillation. Europace. (2015) 17:1868–74. 10.1093/europace/euu406
26.
ZeiPCWongDGardnerEFogartyTMaguireP. Safety and efficacy of stereotactic radioablation targeting pulmonary vein tissues in an experimental model. Heart Rhythm. (2018) 15:1420–7. 10.1016/j.hrthm.2018.04.015
27.
LehmannHIGraeffCSimonielloPConstantinescuATakamiMLugenbielPet al. Feasibility study on cardiac arrhythmia ablation using high-energy heavy ion beams. Sci Rep. (2016) 6:1–13. 10.1038/srep38895
28.
ChangJHChaMJSeoJWKimHJParkSYKimBHet al. Feasibility study on stereotactic radiotherapy for total pulmonary vein isolation in a canine model. Sci Rep. (2021) 11:1–9. 10.1038/s41598-021-91660-y
29.
CuculichPSSchillMRKashaniRMuticSLangACooperDet al. Noninvasive cardiac radiation for ablation of ventricular tachycardia. New England J Med. (2017) 377:2325–36. 10.1056/NEJMoa1613773
30.
KrugDBlanckODemmingTDottermuschMKochKHirtMet al. Stereotactic body radiotherapy for ventricular tachycardia (cardiac radiosurgery): First-in-patient treatment in Germany. Strahlentherapie Onkol. (2020) 196:23–30. 10.1007/s00066-019-01530-w
31.
KianiSKutobLSchneiderFHigginsKALloydMS. Histopathologic and ultrastructural findings in human myocardium after stereotactic body radiation therapy for recalcitrant ventricular tachycardia. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. (2020) 13:e008753. 10.1161/CIRCEP.120.008753
32.
KautznerJJedlickovaKSramkoMPeichlPCvekJIngLKet al. Radiation-induced changes in ventricular myocardium after stereotactic body radiotherapy for recurrent ventricular tachycardia. JACC: Clin Electrophysiol. (2021) 7:1487–92. 10.1016/j.jacep.2021.07.012
33.
ZhangDMNavaraRYinTSzymanskiJGoldsztejnUKenkelCet al. Cardiac radiotherapy induces electrical conduction reprogramming in the absence of transmural fibrosis. Nat Commun. (2021) 12:1–14. 10.1038/s41467-021-25730-0
34.
HohmannSDeisherAJSuzukiAKonishiHRettmannMEMerrellKWet al. Left ventricular function after noninvasive cardiac ablation using proton beam therapy in a porcine model. Heart Rhythm. (2019) 16:1710–9. 10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.04.030
35.
DusiVVitoloVFrigerioLTotaroRValentiniABarcelliniAet al. First-in-man case of non-invasive proton radiotherapy for the treatment of refractory ventricular tachycardia in advanced heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. (2021) 23:195–6. 10.1002/ejhf.2056
36.
QianPCQuadrosKAguilarMWeiCBoeckMBredfeldtJet al. Substrate modification using stereotactic radioablation to treat refractory ventricular tachycardia in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. JACC: Clin Electrophysiol. (2022) 8:49–58. 10.1016/j.jacep.2021.06.016
37.
AminoMKabukiSKuniedaEYagishitaAIkariYYoshiokaK. Analysis of depolarization abnormality and autonomic nerve function after stereotactic body radiation therapy for ventricular tachycardia in a patient with old myocardial infarction. HeartRhythm Case Reports. (2021) 7:306–11. 10.1016/j.hrcr.2021.01.023
38.
AminoMYoshiokaKFurusawaYTanakaSKawabeNHashidaTet al. Inducibility of Ventricular Arrhythmia 1 Year Following Treatment with Heavy Ion Irradiation in Dogs with Myocardial Infarction. PACE - Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. (2017) 40:379–90. 10.1111/pace.13031
39.
HohmannSDeisherAJKonishiHRettmannMESuzukiAMerrellKWet al. Catheter-free ablation of infarct scar through proton beam therapy: Tissue effects in a porcine model. Heart Rhythm. (2020) 17:2190–9. 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.07.011
Summary
Keywords
cardiac stereotactic body radiation therapy, ventricular tachycardia, cellular response, cardiomyopathy, ablation electrophysiology
Citation
Whitaker J, Zei PC, Ahmad S, Niederer S, O'Neill M and Rinaldi CA (2022) The effect of ionizing radiation through cardiac stereotactic body radiation therapy on myocardial tissue for refractory ventricular arrhythmias: A review. Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 9:989886. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.989886
Received
09 July 2022
Accepted
08 August 2022
Published
15 September 2022
Volume
9 - 2022
Edited by
Roberto Rordorf, San Matteo Hospital Foundation (IRCCS), Italy
Reviewed by
Veronica Dusi, University of Turin, Italy; Josef Kautzner, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine (IKEM), Czechia
Updates

Check for updates
Copyright
© 2022 Whitaker, Zei, Ahmad, Niederer, O'Neill and Rinaldi.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: John Whitaker john.whitaker@kcl.ac.uk
This article was submitted to Cardiac Rhythmology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.