Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2021
Implantable cardiac defibrillator events in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Woźniak Olgierd, Borowiec Karolina, Konka Marek, Cicha-Mikołajczyk Alicja, Przybylski Andrzej, Szumowski Łukasz, Hoffman Piotr, Poślednik Krzysztof, Biernacka Elżbieta Katarzyna
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is associated with a risk of sudden cardiac death. Optimal risk stratification is still under debate. The main purpose of this long-term, single-centre observation was to analyse predictors of appropriate and inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) interventions in the population of patients with ARVC with a high risk of life-threatening arrhythmias.
METHODS: The study comprised 65 adult patients (median age 40 years, 48 men) with a definite diagnosis of ARVC who received ICD over a time span of 20 years in primary (40%) or secondary (60%) prevention of sudden cardiac death. The study endpoints were first appropriate and inappropriate ICD interventions (shock or antitachycardia pacing) after device implantation.
RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 7.75 years after ICD implantation, nine patients died and six individuals underwent heart transplantation. Appropriate ICD interventions occurred in 43 patients (66.2%) and inappropriate ICD interventions in 18 patients (27.7%). Multivariable analysis using cause-specific hazard model identified three predictors of appropriate ICD interventions: right ventricle dysfunction (cause-specific HR 2.85, 95% CI 1.56 to 5.21, p<0.001), age <40 years at ICD implantation (cause-specific HR 2.37, 95% CI 1.13 to 4.94, p=0.022) and a history of sustained ventricular tachycardia (cause-specific HR 2.55, 95% CI 1.16 to 5.63, p=0.020). Predictors of inappropriate ICD therapy were not found. Complications related to ICD implantation occurred in 12 patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Right ventricle dysfunction, age <40 years and a history of sustained ventricular tachycardia were predictors of appropriate ICD interventions in patients with ARVC. The results may be used to improve risk stratification before ICD implantation.
METHODS: The study comprised 65 adult patients (median age 40 years, 48 men) with a definite diagnosis of ARVC who received ICD over a time span of 20 years in primary (40%) or secondary (60%) prevention of sudden cardiac death. The study endpoints were first appropriate and inappropriate ICD interventions (shock or antitachycardia pacing) after device implantation.
RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 7.75 years after ICD implantation, nine patients died and six individuals underwent heart transplantation. Appropriate ICD interventions occurred in 43 patients (66.2%) and inappropriate ICD interventions in 18 patients (27.7%). Multivariable analysis using cause-specific hazard model identified three predictors of appropriate ICD interventions: right ventricle dysfunction (cause-specific HR 2.85, 95% CI 1.56 to 5.21, p<0.001), age <40 years at ICD implantation (cause-specific HR 2.37, 95% CI 1.13 to 4.94, p=0.022) and a history of sustained ventricular tachycardia (cause-specific HR 2.55, 95% CI 1.16 to 5.63, p=0.020). Predictors of inappropriate ICD therapy were not found. Complications related to ICD implantation occurred in 12 patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Right ventricle dysfunction, age <40 years and a history of sustained ventricular tachycardia were predictors of appropriate ICD interventions in patients with ARVC. The results may be used to improve risk stratification before ICD implantation.