Introduction: Ventricular tachycardia (VT) poses a significant risk in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD) and catheter ablation are the 2 strategies employed to reduce the risk of future VT episodes. It is not established if one strategy is superior to the other.Hypothesis: Recently, randomized trials have been published comparing the efficacy and safety of both strategies for VT management. Unfortunately, most of these trials included a relatively small number of patients and had different outcomes or composite of outcomes limiting their utility.Methods: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing these treatment modalities for VT management. Criteria for appropriate studies were the inclusion of outcome data for both ablation and AAD arms, history of documented VT or ICD therapy before enrollments, and use of ICD to reliably monitor the incidence. Due to recent advances in substrate-based VT ablation and changes in ICD algorithms we limited our search for studies published in last 10 years. We identified four studies that met our inclusion and exclusion criteria.Results: Our included studies randomized 609 patients, 303 in ablation, and 310 in AAD groups. All-cause mortality data were available for all included studies. The cumulative odds ratio (OR) for all-cause mortality for VT ablation compared to AADs was 0.88, 95% confidence interval [0.56-1.39], p-value 0.58. Cumulative OR for cardiac death was 0.81 [95% CI 0.47-1.38], p-value 0.44, OR for ICD shocks was 0.82[0.57-1.18], p-value 0.29 and the OR for heart failure or cardiac rehospitalization was 0.82 [95% CI 0.53-1.25] p-value 0.35. Treatment-related complications were reported in only two studies with cumulative OR 0.31 [95% CI 0.19-0.51] p <0.00001. Studies used different definitions of treatment related complications.Conclusions: VT ablation and antiarrhythmic drugs appear to be equally effective treatment strategies to prevent all-cause death, cardiac death, heart failure rehospitalization, and ICD shocks but there is a trend towards better results for all stated outcomes with ablation. There was statistically significantly lower incidence of the reported treatment-related complications with ablation compared to AADs.