American heart journal · 2023
Effectiveness of the risk stratification proposed by the 2022 European Heart Rhythm Association Expert Consensus statement on arrhythmic mitral valve prolapse.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАConsensus StatementНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
L'Hoyes Wouter, Robyns Tomas, Moura-Fereira Sara, De Meester Pieter, Dresselaers Tom, Herregods Marie-Christine, Rega Filip, Masci Pier Giorgio, Willems Rik, Bogaert Jan, Vandenberk Bert
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Recently, an expert consensus statement proposed indications where implantation of a primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) may be reasonable in patients with mitral valve prolapse (MVP). The objective was to evaluate the proposed risk stratification by the expert consensus statement.
METHODS: Consecutive patients with MVP without alternative arrhythmic substrates with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) were included in a single-center retrospective registry. Arrhythmic MVP (AMVP) was defined as a total premature ventricular complex burden ≥5%, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT), VT, or ventricular fibrillation. The end point was a composite of SCD, VT, inducible VT, and appropriate ICD shocks.
RESULTS: In total, 169 patients (52.1% male, median age 51.4 years) were included and 99 (58.6%) were classified as AMVP. Multivariate logistic regression identified the presence of late gadolinium enhancement (OR 2.82, 95%CI 1.45-5.50) and mitral annular disjunction (OR 1.98, 95%CI 1.02-3.86) as only predictors of AMVP. According to the EHRA risk stratification, 5 patients with AMVP (5.1%) had a secondary prevention ICD indication, while in 69 patients (69.7%) the implantation of an ICD may be reasonable. During a median follow-up of 8.0 years (IQR 5.0-15.6), the incidence rate for the composite arrhythmic end point was 0.3%/year (95%CI 0.1-0.8).
CONCLUSION: More than half of MVP patients referred for CMR met the AMVP diagnostic criteria. Despite low long-term event rates, in 70% of patients with AMVP the implantation of an ICD may be reasonable. Risk stratification of SCD in MVP remains an important knowledge gap and requires urgent investigation.
METHODS: Consecutive patients with MVP without alternative arrhythmic substrates with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) were included in a single-center retrospective registry. Arrhythmic MVP (AMVP) was defined as a total premature ventricular complex burden ≥5%, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT), VT, or ventricular fibrillation. The end point was a composite of SCD, VT, inducible VT, and appropriate ICD shocks.
RESULTS: In total, 169 patients (52.1% male, median age 51.4 years) were included and 99 (58.6%) were classified as AMVP. Multivariate logistic regression identified the presence of late gadolinium enhancement (OR 2.82, 95%CI 1.45-5.50) and mitral annular disjunction (OR 1.98, 95%CI 1.02-3.86) as only predictors of AMVP. According to the EHRA risk stratification, 5 patients with AMVP (5.1%) had a secondary prevention ICD indication, while in 69 patients (69.7%) the implantation of an ICD may be reasonable. During a median follow-up of 8.0 years (IQR 5.0-15.6), the incidence rate for the composite arrhythmic end point was 0.3%/year (95%CI 0.1-0.8).
CONCLUSION: More than half of MVP patients referred for CMR met the AMVP diagnostic criteria. Despite low long-term event rates, in 70% of patients with AMVP the implantation of an ICD may be reasonable. Risk stratification of SCD in MVP remains an important knowledge gap and requires urgent investigation.