Role of electrophysiological studies in predicting risk of ventricular arrhythmia in early repolarization syndrome
Language English Country United States Media print
Document type Journal Article, Multicenter Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
PubMed
25593056
DOI
10.1016/j.jacc.2014.10.043
PII: S0735-1097(14)06954-X
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Keywords
- early repolarization, sudden cardiac death, ventricular fibrillation,
- MeSH
- Time Factors MeSH
- Adult MeSH
- Electrocardiography methods MeSH
- Ventricular Fibrillation complications diagnosis physiopathology MeSH
- Incidence MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Survival Rate trends MeSH
- Death, Sudden, Cardiac epidemiology etiology prevention & control MeSH
- Follow-Up Studies MeSH
- Predictive Value of Tests MeSH
- Heart Conduction System physiopathology MeSH
- Prognosis MeSH
- Retrospective Studies MeSH
- Check Tag
- Adult MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Multicenter Study MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Geographicals
- Europe epidemiology MeSH
BACKGROUND: The early repolarization (ER) pattern is associated with an increased risk of arrhythmogenic sudden death. However, strategies for risk stratification of patients with the ER pattern are not fully defined. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the role of electrophysiology studies (EPS) in risk stratification of patients with ER syndrome. METHODS: In a multicenter study, 81 patients with ER syndrome (age 36 ± 13 years, 60 males) and aborted sudden death due to ventricular fibrillation (VF) were included. EPS were performed following the index VF episode using a standard protocol. Inducibility was defined by the provocation of sustained VF. Patients were followed up by serial implantable cardioverter-defibrillator interrogations. RESULTS: Despite a recent history of aborted sudden death, VF was inducible in only 18 of 81 (22%) patients. During follow-up of 7.0 ± 4.9 years, 6 of 18 (33%) patients with inducible VF during EPS experienced VF recurrences, whereas 21 of 63 (33%) patients who were noninducible experienced recurrent VF (p = 0.93). VF storm occurred in 3 patients from the inducible VF group and in 4 patients in the noninducible group. VF inducibility was not associated with maximum J-wave amplitude (VF inducible vs. VF noninducible; 0.23 ± 0.11 mV vs. 0.21 ± 0.11 mV; p = 0.42) or J-wave distribution (inferior, odds ratio [OR]: 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33 to 2.81]; p = 0.95; lateral, OR: 1.57 [95% CI: 0.35 to 7.04]; p = 0.56; inferior and lateral, OR: 0.83 [95% CI: 0.27 to 2.55]; p = 0.74), which have previously been demonstrated to predict outcome in patients with an ER pattern. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that current programmed stimulation protocols do not enhance risk stratification in ER syndrome.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montpellier Montpellier France
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nancy Nancy France
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes Nantes France
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes Rennes France
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Strasbourg Strasbourg France
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse Toulouse France
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Tours Tours France
Clinique Mont Godinne Leuven Leuven Belgium
Deutsches Herzzentrum München Munich Germany
Eppendorf Hospital Hamburg Germany
Groupe Hospitalier Pitié Salpêtrière Paris France
Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut Lévêque and Université Victor Segalen Bordeaux 2 Bordeaux France
Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine Department of Cardiology Prague Czech Republic
Service de Cardiologie CHUV Lausanne Switzerland
References provided by Crossref.org