Long QT Syndrome Goldenberg, Ilan, MD; Moss, Arthur J., MD
Journal of the American College of Cardiology,
06/2008, Letnik:
51, Številka:
24
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Long QT Syndrome Ilan Goldenberg, Arthur J. Moss The hereditary long QT syndrome (LQTS) is an important cause of malignant ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death in young individuals with ...normal cardiac morphology. We provide an overview of major advances in the understanding of this genetic channelopathy, including molecular and genetic considerations, recommendations for diagnosis and risk stratification, and therapeutic considerations. Particular focus is placed on the importance of time-dependent and age-specific risk assessment in this population, as well as on recent advances in the understanding of the association between the biophysical function of the ion-channel mutation and the outcome of LQTS patients.
Abstract Objectives This study sought to examine whether imaging of the atrioventricular (AV) membranous septum (MS) by computed tomography (CT) can be used to identify patient-specific anatomic risk ...of high-degree AV block and permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with self-expandable valves. Background MS length represents an anatomic surrogate of the distance between the aortic annulus and the bundle of His and may therefore be inversely related to the risk of conduction system abnormalities after TAVI. Methods Seventy-three consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis underwent contrast-enhanced CT before TAVI. The aortic annulus, aortic valve, and AV junction were assessed, and MS length was measured in the coronal view. Results In 13 patients (18%), high-degree AV block developed, and 21 patients (29%) received a PPM. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed MS length as the most powerful pre -procedural independent predictor of high-degree AV block (odds ratio OR: 1.35, 95% confidence interval CI: 1.1 to 1.7, p = 0.01) and PPM implantation (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.1 to 1.8, p = 0.002). When taking into account pre- and post -procedural parameters, the difference between MS length and implantation depth emerged as the most powerful independent predictor of high-degree AV block (OR: 1.4, 95% CI: 1.2 to 1.7, p < 0.001), whereas the difference between MS length and implantation depth and calcification in the basal septum were the most powerful independent predictors of PPM implantation (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.2 to 1.7, p < 0.001 and OR: 4.9, 95% CI: 1.2 to 20.5, p = 0.03; respectively). Conclusions Short MS, insufficient difference between MS length and implantation depth, and the presence of calcification in the basal septum, factors that may all facilitate mechanical compression of the conduction tissue by the implanted valve, predict conduction abnormalities after TAVI with self-expandable valves. CT assessment of membranous septal anatomy provides unique pre-procedural information about the patient-specific propensity for the risk of AV block.
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a novel treatment for high risk or inoperable patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. However, significant atrioventricular (AV) conduction ...system abnormalities requiring permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation might complicate this procedure. We used best subsets logistic regression analysis to identify the independent predictors for the development of high-degree AV block (HDAVB) among 70 patients who underwent TAVI at 3 referral centers in Israel from 2008 to 2010. The mean age of the study patients was 83 ± 4.6 years. Of the 70 patients, 28 (40%) developed AV conduction abnormalities requiring PPM implantation within 14 days (median 2) of the procedure. The indications for PPM implantation were HDAVB (n = 25), new-onset left bundle branch block with PR prolongation (n = 2), and slow atrial fibrillation (n = 1). Best subsets logistic regression analysis showed that, among the 15 prespecified clinical, electrocardiographic, and echocardiographic candidate risk factors, only right bundle branch block at baseline (odds ratio 43; p = 0.002) and deep valve implantation (<6 mm from the lower edge of the noncoronary cusp to the ventricular end of the prosthesis, odds ratio 22; p <0.001) were independently associated with the development of periprocedural HDAVB. At 3 months of follow-up, HDAVB was still present in 40% of the patients who received PPM implantation for this indication. In conclusion, 40% of the patients who undergo CoreValve TAVI require PPM implantation after the procedure, with most cases (36%) associated with the development of postprocedural HDAVB. Baseline conduction abnormalities (right bundle branch block) and deep valve implantation (>6 mm) independently predicted the development of HDAVB and the need for PPM implantation after CoreValve TAVI.
Abstract
Aims
The benefit of prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is not uniform due to differences in the risk of life-threatening ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular ...fibrillation (VF) and non-arrhythmic mortality. We aimed to develop an ICD benefit prediction score that integrates the competing risks.
Methods and results
The study population comprised all 4531 patients enrolled in the MADIT trials. Best-subsets Fine and Gray regression analysis was used to develop prognostic models for VT (≥200 b.p.m.)/VF vs. non-arrhythmic mortality (defined as death without prior sustained VT/VF). Eight predictors of VT/VF (male, age < 75 years, prior non-sustained VT, heart rate > 75 b.p.m., systolic blood pressure < 140 mmHg, ejection fraction ≤ 25%, myocardial infarction, and atrialarrhythmia) and 7 predictors of non-arrhythmic mortality (age ≥ 75 years, diabetes mellitus, body mass index < 23 kg/m2, ejection fraction ≤ 25%, New York Heart Association ≥II, ICD vs. cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator, and atrial arrhythmia) were identified. The two scores were combined to create three MADIT-ICD benefit groups. In the highest benefit group, the 3-year predicted risk of VT/VF was three-fold higher than the risk of non-arrhythmic mortality (20% vs. 7%, P < 0.001). In the intermediate benefit group, the difference in the corresponding predicted risks was attenuated (15% vs. 9%, P < 0.01). In the lowest benefit group, the 3-year predicted risk of VT/VF was similar to the risk of non-arrhythmic mortality (11% vs. 12%, P = 0.41). A personalized ICD benefit score was developed based on the distribution of the two competing risks scores in the study population (https://is.gd/madit). Internal and external validation confirmed model stability.
Conclusions
We propose the novel MADIT-ICD benefit score that predicts the likelihood of prophylactic ICD benefit through personalized assessment of the risk of VT/VF weighed against the risk of non-arrhythmic mortality.
Graphical Abstract
Objectives The present study was designed to explore the 8-year survival benefit of a nonresynchronization implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) according to a simple risk stratification ...score. Background There is limited information regarding factors that predict the benefit of primary prevention with an ICD during long-term follow-up. Methods This study used a previously developed risk score including 5 clinical factors (New York Heart Association functional class >II, age >70 years, blood urea nitrogen >26 mg/dl, QRS duration >0.12 s, and atrial fibrillation) to evaluate 8-year ICD survival benefit within risk score categories among 1,191 MADIT-II (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II) patients. Results Patients with low (0 risk factors, n = 345) and intermediate risk (1 to 2 risk factors, n = 646) demonstrated a significantly higher probability of survival at 8-year follow-up when treated by ICD as compared with non-ICD therapy (75% vs. 58%, p = 0.004; and 47% vs. 31%, p < 0.001, respectively). By contrast, among high-risk patients (3 or more risk factors, n = 200), there was no significant difference in 8-year survival between the ICD and non-ICD subgroups (19% vs. 17%, p = 0.50). Consistently, multivariate analysis showed that ICD therapy was associated with a significant long-term survival benefit among low- and intermediate-risk patients (hazard ratio HR: 0.52, p < 0.001, and HR: 0.66, p < 0.001, respectively), whereas treatment with an ICD was not associated with a significant benefit among high-risk patients (HR: 0.84, p = 0.25). Conclusions These findings suggest that a simple risk score can identify patients who derive significant long-term benefit from primary ICD therapy. High-risk patients with multiple comorbidities composed 17% of the MADIT-II population and did not derive long-term benefit from nonresynchronization device therapy.
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have become the mainstay of preventive measures for sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, there are limited data on rates of appropriate life-saving ICD ...shock therapies in contemporary real-life settings.
The purpose of the study was to evaluate the rate of appropriate life-saving ICD shock therapies in a contemporary registry.
The Israeli ICD Registry includes all implants and other ICD operative procedures nationwide. The present study comprises 2349 consecutive cases who were enrolled in the Registry and prospectively followed up for information regarding survival, hospitalizations, and ICD therapies since 2010.
Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the rate of appropriate ICD shock therapy at 30-month follow-up was 2.6% among patients who received an ICD for primary prevention compared with 7.4% among those who received a device for secondary prevention (log-rank P < .001). Rates of appropriate ICD shocks among primary prevention patients were 1.1% at 1-year of follow-up and 2.6% at 30 months, whereas the corresponding rates in the secondary prevention group were 3.8% at 1 year and 7.4% at 30 months (log-rank P < .001). A total of 253 patients (4.8%) died during follow-up, 65% of noncardiac causes.
Rates of life-saving appropriate ICD shock therapies among patients implanted with a defibrillator for the primary prevention of SCD in a contemporary real-world setting are lower than reported previously. These findings suggest a need for improved risk stratification and patient selection in this population.
The benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy depends upon appropriate evaluation of a persisting risk of sudden death and estimation of the patient's overall survival. ...Assessment of a stable and unchangeable arrhythmogenic substrate is often difficult. Structural abnormality and ventricular dysfunction, the two major risk parameters, may recover, and heart failure symptoms can improve so that ICD therapy may not be indicated. Risk stratification can take time while the patient continues to be at high risk of arrhythmic death, and patients may need temporary bridging by a defibrillator in cases of interrupted ICD therapy. The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) combines a long-term electrocardiogram (ECG)-monitoring system with an external automatic defibrillator. The LIfeVest® (ZOLL, Pittsburgh, PA, USA) is composed of a garment, containing two defibrillation patch electrodes on the back, and an elastic belt with a front-defibrillation patch electrode and four non-adhesive ECG electrodes, connected to a monitoring and defibrillation unit. The WCD is a safe and effective tool to terminate ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation events, unless a conscious patient withholds shock delivery. It may be used in patients in the early phase after acute myocardial infarction with poor left ventricular function, after acute coronary revascularization procedures (percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (≤35%), in patients with acute heart failure in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy of uncertain aetiology and prognosis. The WCD may be helpful in subjects with syncope of assumed tachyarrhythmia origin or in patients with inherited arrhythmia syndromes. The WCD may replace ICD implantation in patients waiting for heart transplantation or who need a ventricular-assist device. This review describes the technical details and characteristics of the WCD, discusses its various potential applications, and reports the currently available experience with the wearable defibrillator.
This study aimed to determine whether QRS morphology identifies patients who benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-D) and whether it influences the risk of primary ...and secondary end points in patients enrolled in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT) trial.
Baseline 12-lead ECGs were evaluated with regard to QRS morphology. Heart failure event or death was the primary end point of the trial. Death, heart failure event, ventricular tachycardia, and ventricular fibrillation were secondary end points. Among 1817 patients with available sinus rhythm ECGs at baseline, there were 1281 (70%) with left bundle-branch block (LBBB), 228 (13%) with right bundle-branch block, and 308 (17%) with nonspecific intraventricular conduction disturbances. The latter 2 groups were defined as non-LBBB groups. Hazard ratios for the primary end point for comparisons of CRT-D patients versus patients who only received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) were significantly (P < 0.001) lower in LBBB patients (0.47; P < 0.001) than in non-LBBB patients (1.24; P = 0.257). The risk of ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, or death was decreased significantly in CRT-D patients with LBBB but not in non-LBBB patients. Echocardiographic parameters showed significantly (P < 0.001) greater reduction in left ventricular volumes and increase in ejection fraction with CRT-D in LBBB than in non-LBBB patients.
Heart failure patients with New York Heart Association class I or II and ejection fraction ≤ 30% and LBBB derive substantial clinical benefit from CRT-D: a reduction in heart failure progression and a reduction in the risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias. No clinical benefit was observed in patients with a non-LBBB QRS pattern (right bundle-branch block or intraventricular conduction disturbances).
URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00180271.
Objectives We aimed to evaluate the relationship between echocardiographic response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and the risk of subsequent ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VTAs). ...Background Current data regarding the effect of CRT on the risk of VTA are limited and conflicting. Methods The risk of a first appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy for VTA (including ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, and ventricular flutter) was compared between high- and low-echocardiographic responders to CRT defibrillator (CRT-D) therapy (defined as ≥25% and <25% reductions, respectively, in left ventricular end-systolic volume LVESV at 1 year compared with baseline) and ICD-only patients enrolled in the MADIT-CRT (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial–Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy). Results The cumulative probability of a first VTA at 2 years after assessment of echocardiographic response was highest among low responders to CRT-D (28%), intermediate among ICD-only patients (21%), and lowest among high responders to CRT-D (12%), with p < 0.001 for the overall difference during follow-up. Multivariate analysis showed that high responders to CRT-D experienced a significant 55% reduction in the risk of VTA compared with ICD-only patients (p < 0.001), whereas the risk of VTA was not significantly different between low responders and ICD-only patients (hazard ratio HR: 1.26; p = 0.21). Consistently, assessment of response to CRT-D as a continuous measure showed that incremental 10% reductions in left ventricular end-systolic volume were associated with corresponding reductions in the risk of subsequent VTA (HR: 0.80; p < 0.001), VTA/death (HR: 0.79; p < 0.001), ventricular tachycardia (HR: 0.80; p < 0.001), and ventricular fibrillation/ventricular flutter (HR: 0.75; p = 0.044). Conclusions In patients with left ventricular dysfunction enrolled in the MADIT-CRT trial, reverse remodeling was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of subsequent life-threatening VTAs. (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial–Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy MADIT-CRT; NCT00180271 )
An important determinant of successful cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure is the position of the left ventricular (LV) pacing lead. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of ...the LV lead position on outcome in patients randomized to cardiac resynchronization-defibrillation in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT) study.
The location of the LV lead was assessed by means of coronary venograms and chest x-rays recorded at the time of device implantation. The LV lead location was classified along the short axis into an anterior, lateral, or posterior position and along the long axis into a basal, midventricular, or apical region. The primary end point of MADIT-CRT was heart failure (HF) hospitalization or death, whichever came first. The LV lead position was assessed in 799 patients, (55% patients ≥65 years of age, 26% female, 10% LV ejection fraction ≤25%, 55% ischemic cardiomyopathy, and 71% left bundle-branch block) with a follow-up of 29±11 months. The extent of cardiac resynchronization therapy benefit was similar for leads in the anterior, lateral, or posterior position (P=0.652). The apical lead location compared with leads located in the nonapical position (basal or midventricular region) was associated with a significantly increased risk for heart failure/death (hazard ratio=1.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.09 to 2.71; P=0.019) after adjustment for the clinical covariates. The apical lead position was also associated with an increased risk for death (hazard ratio=2.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.42 to 5.97; P=0.004).
LV leads positioned in the apical region were associated with an unfavorable outcome, suggesting that this lead location should be avoided in cardiac resynchronization therapy. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00180271.
PDF
