JACC. Clinical electrophysiology · 2024
Clinical Features, Long-Term Prognosis, and Clinical Management of Genotype-Negative Long QT Syndrome Patients.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Shimamoto Keiko, Dagradi Federica, Ohno Seiko, Spazzolini Carla, Crotti Lia, Giovenzana Fulvio L F, Musu Giulia, Pedrazzini Matteo, Kusano Kengo, Takegami Misa, Nishimura Kunihiro, Horie Minoru, Aiba Takeshi, Schwartz Peter J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Approximately 15% to 20% of patients clinically diagnosed with long QT syndrome (LQTS) are genotype-negative (GEN-). Whether they have a different arrhythmic risk or should be managed differently remains unclear, often leading to incomplete treatment.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare clinical aspects of GEN- and genotype-positive (GEN+) LQTS patients.
METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 832 LQTS patients genetically screened in Japan (n = 347) and Italy (n = 485), including 698 with a disease-causing variant in the KCNQ1, KCNH2, and SCN5A genes (GEN+), and 134 without variants in these LQTS-related genes (GEN-).
RESULTS: At diagnosis, the Japanese patients were more often probands (86% vs 60%), symptomatic (39% vs 18%), and of younger age than the Italian patients; conversely, they used less β-blockers (65% vs 95%), more rarely had a family history (FH) of LQTS (42% vs 73%), and had more cardiac events during follow-up (13% vs 4%) (P < 0.001 for all comparisons). Within the Japanese cohort, the GEN- had more cardiac arrests, used less β-blockers, and had much less FH for LQTS compared their GEN+ counterpart. The Italian cohort was more homogeneous, with just more LQTS FH among the GEN+. QTc shortening (close to 30 ms in all groups) during follow-up was similar between Japanese and Italian patients, irrespective of their being GEN+ or GEN-. In both cohorts, during an average follow-up of 6 and 7 years, respectively, GEN+ and GEN- patients showed a comparable clinical outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: Arrhythmic risk is similar between GEN+ and GEN- LQTS patients; they should be managed and treated in the same way.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare clinical aspects of GEN- and genotype-positive (GEN+) LQTS patients.
METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 832 LQTS patients genetically screened in Japan (n = 347) and Italy (n = 485), including 698 with a disease-causing variant in the KCNQ1, KCNH2, and SCN5A genes (GEN+), and 134 without variants in these LQTS-related genes (GEN-).
RESULTS: At diagnosis, the Japanese patients were more often probands (86% vs 60%), symptomatic (39% vs 18%), and of younger age than the Italian patients; conversely, they used less β-blockers (65% vs 95%), more rarely had a family history (FH) of LQTS (42% vs 73%), and had more cardiac events during follow-up (13% vs 4%) (P < 0.001 for all comparisons). Within the Japanese cohort, the GEN- had more cardiac arrests, used less β-blockers, and had much less FH for LQTS compared their GEN+ counterpart. The Italian cohort was more homogeneous, with just more LQTS FH among the GEN+. QTc shortening (close to 30 ms in all groups) during follow-up was similar between Japanese and Italian patients, irrespective of their being GEN+ or GEN-. In both cohorts, during an average follow-up of 6 and 7 years, respectively, GEN+ and GEN- patients showed a comparable clinical outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: Arrhythmic risk is similar between GEN+ and GEN- LQTS patients; they should be managed and treated in the same way.