Citations

Abstract Background and Aims Patients with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT) are at risk for potentially life-threatening arrhythmic events (AEs) even while treated with β-blockers. The aim was to develop a model for individualized prediction of AEs in patients with RYR2-mediated CPVT on β-blocker monotherapy. Methods The derivation and independent validation cohorts included 743 and 129 patients, respectively. AEs were defined as arrhythmic syncope, appropriate implantable cardioverter–defibrillator shock, sudden cardiac arrest (SCA), and sudden cardiac death. Near-fatal or fatal AEs (nf/fAEs) included all AEs except for arrhythmic syncope. Prediction models using Cox regression were developed and internally and externally validated. Results A total of 102 (13.7%) patients in the derivation cohort and 24 (18.6%) patients in the validation cohort experienced ≥1 AE over a median follow-up of 5.1 [interquartile range (IQR), 7.7] and 2.4 (IQR, 4.4) years, respectively. Predictors of AE were arrhythmic syncope or SCA prior to diagnosis and age at β-blocker initiation. In the derivation and validation cohorts, the optimism-corrected C-indices of the models for AE were 0.67 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62–0.72] and 0.59 (95% CI 0.48–0.71), respectively. For nf/fAEs, ventricular arrhythmia severity before β-blocker initiation was a fourth independent predictor, and C-indices of the models in the derivation and validation cohorts were 0.74 (95% CI 0.68–0.80) and 0.60 (95% CI 0.47–0.72), respectively. In the derivation cohort, calibration slopes were 1.00 (95% CI 0.59–1.41) for AE and 1.00 (95% CI 0.69–1.32) for nf/fAE. Conclusions These externally validated risk prediction models using clinical parameters accurately distinguished CPVT patients on β-blocker monotherapy at low and high risk for future AEs while treated with β-blockers. These models provide guidance for implementation of clinical management therapies to prevent AEs in patients with CPVT.

Abstract Background and Aims Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are critical for preventing sudden cardiac death (SCD) in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC). This study aims to identify cross-continental differences in utilization of primary prevention ICDs and survival free from sustained ventricular arrhythmia (VA) in ARVC. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of ARVC patients without prior VA enrolled in clinical registries from 11 countries throughout Europe and North America. Patients were classified according to whether they received treatment in North America or Europe and were further stratified by baseline predicted VA risk into low- (<10%/5 years), intermediate- (10%–25%/5 years), and high-risk (>25%/5 years) groups. Differences in ICD implantation and survival free from sustained VA events (including appropriate ICD therapy) were assessed. Results One thousand ninety-eight patients were followed for a median of 5.1 years; 554 (50.5%) received a primary prevention ICD, and 286 (26.0%) experienced a first VA event. After adjusting for baseline risk factors, North Americans were more than three times as likely to receive ICDs {hazard ratio (HR) 3.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.5, 3.8]} but had only mildly increased risk for incident sustained VA [HR 1.4 (95% CI 1.1, 1.8)]. North Americans without ICDs were at higher risk for incident sustained VA [HR 2.1 (95% CI 1.3, 3.4)] than Europeans. Conclusions North American ARVC patients were substantially more likely than Europeans to receive primary prevention ICDs across all arrhythmic risk strata. A lower rate of ICD implantation in Europe was not associated with a higher rate of VA events in those without ICDs.

Introduction: Sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) and death (SCD) are the most serious sequelae of many genetic heart diseases (GHDs). Increased awareness of this has led to increased detection in employment screenings. For patients in high-risk jobs, premature and potentially unnecessary termination from their profession, rather than “Return-to-Work (RTW),” has become an undesired consequence of this awareness. The objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of patients with GHDs in high-risk professions who were allowed to RTW. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 3,641 working-age patients referred for evaluation of a potential GHD between 6/2000-12/2021 to identify those either in or being recruited into a high-risk profession. A profession was defined as “high-risk” if it is safety-sensitive or required regular medical evaluations. Charts were reviewed for medical history, RTW decision making, and breakthrough cardiac events (BCEs). Results: Overall, 33 patients [(0.9%); 3 females (9%); mean age at diagnosis 25 ± 15 years] had been either put on hold from their high-risk job (n = 15; 45%) or disqualified as a recruit (18; 55%) prior to our evaluation due to their GHD diagnosis. This included 15 military, 10 pilots, 6 law enforcement and first responders, and 2 commercial driver license professionals and recruits. Most patients were diagnosed with Long QT syndrome (n = 23; 70%). After treatment initiation, 14 (93%) professionals and 16 (89%) recruits received physician RTW approval while 3 (9%) patients did not receive RTW approval due to disease severity and/or unwillingness to initiate treatment. Of the remaining 14 professionals that received physician RTW approval, 4 (29%) were not allowed to return to their jobs, while 14/16 recruits (88%) were not permitted to start their career. None of the RTW-approved patients had a BCE after evaluation (160.7 follow-up years). Conclusions: Patients with GHDs in high-risk professions are often terminated due to perceived SCA/SCD risk. However, within our small cohort, the risk of BCEs in optimally treated patients was low. This data suggests that the certification process of individuals in these high-risk and safety-sensitive occupations should be further examined and potentially modified.

Background: Long QT syndrome (LQTS) is a genetic heart disease affecting about 1 in 2000 persons. Around 40% of patients with LQTS can have a nondiagnostic, normal QTc at rest. The treadmill exercise stress test (TEST) can help unmask patients with concealed LQTS with a characteristic maladaptive, paradoxical increase in QTc ( 460 ms) during the recovery phase. In fact, the recovery phase QTc value has been added to the latest diagnostic score for LQTS. Objective: To characterize the TEST-derived QTc profile of untreated patients with LQTS and determine its diagnostic and prognostic utility. Methods: Retrospective analysis was performed on TEST data derived from 249 patients with LQTS (129 LQT1, 64 LQT2 and 56 LQT3) untreated at the time of their TEST compared with 236 controls. The Bazett’s corrected QTc was calculated at rest (sitting, supine, and standing), during exercise at 1 min, 3 mins, and peak exercise, and during recovery phase at 1, 3 and 5 mins. Results: The mean resting QTc was significantly higher in LQTS patients (457 ± 30 ms) compared to controls (420 ± 24 ms; p<0.0001) as well as at every stage during the TEST (p<0.001). For LQT1 patients, highest QTc was observed at peak exercise (mean 496 ± 38 ms) and during the third minute of recovery phase (mean 500 ± 40 ms). In contrast, LQT2 patients showed the lowest QTc (mean 452 ± 48 ms) during peak exercise but the greatest QTc latency (QTc at 5 min - QTc at 1 min recovery; mean QTc latency 33 ± 77 ms; p=0.005) compared to controls. For LQT3, the mean QTc was greatest at rest compared to controls (p<0.001), and there was no difference during exercise and recovery phases. Among 162 LQT1 and LQT2 patients that presented with concealed LQTS, 119 (73%) showed a maladaptive QT response. ROC analysis showed that in patients with LQT1, a maladaptive QTc > 523 ms at 3 min of recovery was highly predictive of breakthrough cardiac events (AUC 0.84; sensitivity 100%, specificity 72%); no such association was identified for LQT2 or 3. Conclusions: This comprehensive characterization of the QTc response before, during, and after a TEST in the largest untreated cohort of patients with LQTS provides important genotype-specific characteristics and can be used as a predictor for potential LQT1-triggered cardiac events after diagnosis and treatment.

Introduction: Pathogenic loss-of-function variants in the RBM20 -encoded RNA-binding motif 20 splicing regulator cause a severe form of arrhythmogenic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). Erroneous splicing of TTN -encoded titin contributes to the pathogenesis of RBM20 -mediated disease. However, studies exploring the clinical course of RBM20 -mediated arrhythmogenic DCM alone or in comparison to TTN -mediated DCM, the most common familial cause of DCM, are lacking. Methods: The Mayo Clinic Genetic Arrhythmogenic Cardiomyopathy Registry (n=391) was used to identify all patients with a pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variant in either RBM20 or TTN . For the purposes of this study, a ventricular arrhythmia (VA) event was defined as sudden cardiac arrest, sustained ventricular arrhythmia, or an appropriate ICD shock and an advanced heart failure (AHF) event was defined as ventricular assist device implantation or heart transplantation. Results: Overall, 40 patients with a P/LP variant in RBM20 (50% female) and 70 patients with a P/LP variant in TTN (43% female) were identified. The prevalence of a cardiac phenotype in patients with RBM20- and TTN -mediated disease was 88% and 83%, respectively. RBM20 patients were more likely to have a family history of sudden cardiac arrest (78% vs 34%; p < 0.0001) and cardiomyopathy (90% vs 61%; p=0.001). No difference in rate of ICD implantation (35% versus 33%) was observed. Interestingly, the prevalence of AHF events (10% vs 6%; p=0.5) and VA events (28% vs 24%; p=0.7) was similar between RBM20 - and TTN -positive patients. However, RBM20 patients were younger than TTN patients at the time of their event (37 ± 18 years vs 50 ± 17; p=0.0004). Time-to-event analysis showed RBM20 patients had an earlier time to AHF event (p=0.05) and time to VA event (p=0.03) than TTN patients. The mean age for AHF events was 25 years for RBM20 patients (N=4) and 47 years for TTN patients (N=4). The mean age for VA events was 29 years for RBM20 patients (N=10) and 42 years for TTN patients (N=14). Conclusions: RBM20 -mediated arrhythmogenic DCM represents a highly penetrant genetic heart disease with potentially life-threatening VAs and end stage heart failure manifestations occurring at a significantly younger age in comparison to TTN -mediated DCM.

Introduction: Myocardial inflammation likely contributes to the pathogenesis of arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy (ACM), a clinically and genetically heterogenous disorder characterized by ventricular dysfunction and potentially life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Due to phenotypic overlap, some patients with genetic ACM may have been evaluated for an underlying inflammatory cardiomyopathy, namely cardiac sarcoidosis. However, the cardiac fludeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) findings in ACM patients have not been assessed systematically. Methods: All genotype-positive patients in the Mayo Clinic ACM registry who received a cardiac FDG PET were included in this study. The cardiac FDG PET scan consisted of a resting myocardial perfusion scan with N13-ammonia as well as a F18-FDG scan after a high-fat diet to suppress physiologic FDG uptake. Pertinent demographic, genetic, imaging, and outcome data were extracted from the medical record. Results: Collectively, 12 (75% female) genotype-positive ACM patients received a cardiac PET FDG scan as part of their clinical evaluation (median age at scan 45.3 years [IQR 38.9-62.1]). Amongst these patients, pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants were detected in LMNA (n=7), DSP (n=3), FLNC (n=1), and PLN (n=1). Of note, 6/12 (50%) had abnormal myocardial FDG uptake, including diffuse (entire myocardium) uptake in 2/6 (33%), focal (1-2 segments) uptake in 2/6 (33%) and patchy (3+ segments) in 2/6 (33%). Median myocardial standardized uptake value ratio was 2.1 (IQR 1.5-2.6). Interestingly, LMNA -positive patients accounted for 3 out of 6 (50%) positive studies (diffuse uptake in 2 and focal uptake in 1). Conclusion: Myocardial FDG uptake is common in genetic ACM patients undergoing cardiac FDG PET. This finding further supports the role of myocardial inflammation in genetic ACM and demonstrates the ability of cardiac FDG PET to readily detect this phenomenon. Further investigation is needed to determine (i) the role of cardiac FDG PET in the evaluation of genetic ACM, (ii) if FDG uptake in genetic ACM has prognostic value and (iii) whether the attenuation of myocardial inflammation with immunosuppressive agents can impact the clinical course of inflammatory genetic ACMs.

Background: Highly caffeinated energy drinks (HCEDs) can trigger life-threatening cardiac arrhythmias in individuals with and without an underlying genetic predisposition. Though the mechanism(s) responsible for these events remain unclear, it has been postulated that high caffeine may alter heart rate, blood pressure, cardiac contractility, and cardiac repolarization in a manner that is pro-arrhythmic. Objective: To describe our experience regarding sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) events occurring in proximity to HCED consumption in patients with underling genetic heart diseases. Methods: All SCA survivors referred to the Mayo Clinic Windland Smith Rice Genetic Heart Rhythm Clinic for clinical and/or molecular evaluation were reviewed to identify those with a history of HCED consumption prior to their event. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, documented HCED consumption, and temporal relationship of HCED consumption to SCA were extracted from the electronic medical record. Results: Among 144 SCA survivors with a structurally normal heart, 8 (6 females; mean age at event 28 ± 8 years) experienced an unexplained SCA associated temporally with HCED consumption. Of these, 5 (63%) had either long QT syndrome (n=3) or catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (n=2). The remaining 3 were diagnosed with unexplained SCA/idiopathic ventricular fibrillation after a comprehensive evaluation. Three patients (37%) were habitual HCED consumers while 5 (63%) imbibed for the first time with consumption ranging from several hours to a few minutes before the SCA. Seven patients (88%) required a rescue shock (average 2 ± 2 shocks/patient) while 1 was manually resuscitated. Upon follow-up, 6 (75%) were dismissed with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator, 1 (13%) on pharmacologic therapy, and 1 (13%) underwent denervation surgery. All SCA survivors have quit drinking HCEDs and have been event-free since. Conclusion: Overall, 8/144 (5.6%) of SCA survivors evaluated in our program experienced a SCA in proximity to consuming a HCED. Although larger cohort studies are needed to elucidate the precise mechanism for HCED-triggered/associated SCA and quantify its precise pro-arrhythmic risk, it seems prudent to sound an early warning.

Background: The estimated prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) globally is about 5%. For patients with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT), ADHD-directed stimulant therapy is relatively contraindicated. However, previous studies have shown that use of these treatments is safe for patients with long QT syndrome, a similar genetic heart disease. Whether this is the same for patients with CPVT remains unknown. Objective: To evaluate ADHD-directed treatment, outcome, and frequency of CPVT-triggered events in patients with CPVT and concomitant ADHD. Methods: A retrospective electronic medical record review of 216 patients with CPVT evaluated in Mayo Clinic’s Windland Smith Rice Genetic Heart Rhythm Clinic was performed to determine the prevalence of concomitant ADHD and the incidence of CPVT-triggered events in these patients. Results: Overall, 14 patients (6%) were diagnosed with CPVT and concomitant ADHD (6 female, average age 19 ± 3 years). At the time of first evaluation, ADHD-directed stimulant therapy was stopped or advised against in 8/14 patients (57%). It was (re)started in 11 patients (79%) following comprehensive evaluation and treatment initiation for CPVT with pharmacologic therapy in 14/14 patients (100%), denervation surgery in 12 (86%), and an implantable cardioverter defibrillator in 4 (29%). Prior to Mayo Clinic evaluation, 10 patients (71%) treated for CPVT had a breakthrough cardiac event, without being on stimulant therapy, while 4 patients (29%) had an event while being treated for both CPVT and ADHD for an average time on stimulant therapy of 6 ± 6 years. Following CPVT treatment optimization and ADHD stimulant (re)initiation, patients have remained event-free for a total of 82 patient years (mean follow-up 6 ± 5 years). Conclusion: Among patients with CPVT, the prevalence of ADHD was similar to that in the general population, which can be treated safely and effectively with stimulant therapy. Although the rate of adverse events was low in stimulant-treated patients, physicians should weigh the potential effects of suboptimal treatment of ADHD with the theoretical proarrhythmic risk from stimulant medications on a case-by-case basis.