For information regarding optimal ICD programming, refer to the 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement.S7.1.3-26 APHRS indicates Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society; EHRA, Eu- ropean Heart Rhythm Association; HRS, Heart Rhythm Society; IHD, ischemic heart disease; ICD, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; PVC, premature ventricular complex; NICM, nonischemic cardiomyopathy; SOLAECE, Sociedad Latinoamericana de Estimulaci n Card aca y Electrofisiolog a; VF, ventricular fibrillation; and VT, ventricular tachycardia. Recommendations for Treatment of Recurrent VA in Patients With Ischemic Heart Disease (Continued) COR LOE Recommendations CLINICAL STATEMENTS AND GUIDELINES mortality among the patients with NICM who received amiodarone (P=0.07).S7.1.3-20 2. Patients with prior MI may present with fre- quent episodes of sustained monomorphic VT or recurrent VF episodes that are initiated by PVCs arising from Purkinje Fibers in the peri-infarct zone. VA storms are associated with increased The arrhythmia substrate is usually in the subendocardium. The random- ized VANISH (Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation versus Escalated Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy in Ischemic Heart Disease) trialS7.1.3-4 compared escalating antiarrhythmic medication therapy versus catheter ablation for patients with prior MI and recurrent sustained monomorphic VT despite antiarrhythmic medications. The primary outcome, a composite of death, VT storm, or ICD shocks occurred in 59.1% in the ablation group and in 68.5% in the escalated-therapy group. There was no difference in mortality between the groups. Recurrent ICD shocks and VT storm and treatment-related adverse events were lower in the ablation group. In a subgroup analysis, patients having VT on amiodarone had better outcomes with ablation compared with increasing amiodarone or adding mexiletine to amiodarone. For patients receiving medica- tions other than amiodarone, catheter abla- tion did not reduce the risk of ICD shocks or VT storm compared with switching to amioda- rone. 