Sudden death during empiric amiodarone therapy in symptomatic hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Effect of beta-blockers and exercise restriction on the prevention of sudden cardiac death in pediatric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Risk assessment tools and effective prevention strategies for sudden cardiac death (SCD) in pediatric patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) have not been established. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of beta-blockers and exercise restriction for SCD prevention in this population.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients aged <18 years who were diagnosed with HCM at our center between January 1996 and December 2021. SCD and aborted SCD were defined as SCD equivalents. We divided patients based on whether they were prescribed beta-blockers or exercise restriction and compared the outcomes among the groups. The primary outcome was the overall survival (OS), and the secondary outcome was the cumulative SCD equivalent rate. Outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard analysis. We also compared patients according to the occurrence of SCD equivalents to identify SCD risk predictors.

RESULTS

Among the 43 included patients [mean age, 7.7 (1.6-12.1) years; 23 male individuals], SCD equivalents occurred in 13 patients over 11.2 (4.5-15.6) years of follow-up, among whom 12 were resuscitated and 1 died. The OS rate was significantly higher in the beta-blocker and exercise restriction groups than in the non-beta-blocker and non-exercise restriction groups (81.3 % vs. 19.1 %, p < 0.01 and 57.4 % vs. 12.7 %, p < 0.01, respectively). Among the 13 patients with SCD equivalents, 5 had 9 recurrent SCD equivalents. A significant difference was observed between the SCD equivalent and non-SCD equivalent groups in the history of suspected arrhythmogenic syncope (p < 0.01) in the univariable but not in the multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Beta-blockers and exercise restriction may decrease the risk of SCD in pediatric patients with HCM and should be considered for SCD prevention in this population, particularly because predicting SCD in these patients remains challenging.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in childhood

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy has important differences in children compared with adults, particularly with regard to the range of causes and the outcomes in infants. Survival is highly dependent on etiology, particularly in the youngest patients, and pursuit of the specific cause is therefore necessary. The clinical utility of defining the genotype in children with familial hypertrophic cardiomyopathy exceeds that at other ages and has a highly favorable cost/benefit ratio. Although most of the available information concerning treatment and prevention of sudden death is derived in adults, management of children requires consideration of the differences in age-specific risk/benefit ratios.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in childhood and adolescence - strategies to prevent sudden death

Clinically overt hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is the most common cause of sudden unexpected death in childhood and has significantly higher sudden death mortality in the 8- to 16-year age range than in the 17- to 30-year age range. A combination of electrocardiographic risk factors (a limb-lead ECG voltage sum >10 mV) and/or a septal wall thickness >190% of upper limit of normal for age (z-score > 3.72) defines a paediatric high-risk patient with great sensitivity. Syncope, blunted blood pressure response to exercise, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia and a malignant family history are additional risk factors. Of the medical treatments used, only beta-blocker therapy with lipophilic beta-blockers (i.e. propranolol, metoprolol or bisoprolol) have been shown to significantly reduce risk of sudden death, with doses ≥ 6 mg/kg BW in propranolol equivalents giving around a tenfold reduction in risk. Disopyramide therapy is a very useful adjunct to beta-blockers to improve prognosis in those patients that have dynamic outflow obstruction in spite of large doses of beta-blocker, and its use in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is not associated with significant pro-arrhythmia mortality. Calcium-channel blockers increase the risk of heart failure-associated death in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) patients with severe generalized hypertrophy and should be avoided in such patients. Amiodarone does not protect against sudden death, and long-term use in children usually has to be terminated because of side effects. Therapy with internal cardioverter defibrillator implantation has high paediatric morbidity, 27% incidence of inappropriate shocks, and does not absolutely protect against mortality but is indicated as secondary prevention or in very high-risk patients.

Life expectancy gains and cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter/defibrillators for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is a devastating complication of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). The optimal strategy for the primary prevention of SCD in HCM remains controversial.

METHODS

Using a Markov model, we compared the health benefits and cost-effectiveness of 3 strategies for the primary prevention of SCD: implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD) insertion, amiodarone therapy, or no therapy. We modeled hypothetical cohorts of 45-year-old patients with HCM with no history of cardiac arrest but at significant risk of SCD (3%/y).

RESULTS

Over a lifetime, compared with no therapy, ICD therapy increased quality-adjusted survival by 4.7 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at an additional cost of $142,800 ($30,000 per QALY), whereas amiodarone increased quality-adjusted survival by 2.8 QALYs at an additional cost of $104,900 ($37,300 per QALY). Compared with no therapy, ICD therapy would cost < $50,000 per QALY for patients (i) aged 25, with > or = 1 risk factors for SCD, and (ii) aged 45 or 65, with > or = 2 risk factors for SCD.

CONCLUSIONS

An ICD strategy is projected to yield the greatest increase in quality-adjusted life expectancy of the 3 treatment strategies evaluated. Combined consideration of age and the number of risk factors for SCD may allow more precise tailoring of ICD therapy to its expected benefits.

Primary Prophylaxis of Sudden Death in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy, Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy, and Dilated Cardiomyopathy

We present an evidence-based overview of primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. Several recent studies have provided important data regarding pharmacologic and device-based therapy for patients with conditions that confer high risk for sudden death. A rational approach to these therapies, with emphasis on implanted cardiovertor defibrillators, is discussed.

The prevention of sudden death in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a familial myocardial disease caused by mutations in cardiac sarcomeric proteins. HCM is characterised by myocyte disarray and myocardial fibrosis. Most patients are largely asymptomatic but some are prone to a number of disease-related complications, the most problematic of which is sudden cardiac death. Diagnosing patients who are at risk has not been easy because of the clinical heterogeneity of the disease, the frequent absence of symptoms prior to sudden cardiac death and the relatively low disease prevalence and annual mortality rates. To date, both low-dose amiodarone and internal cardioverter/defibrillator implantation have been advocated in high-risk individuals. Further improvements in clinical understanding and risk stratification are necessary to identify HCM patients who are at high risk of sudden death.

The role of pharmacologic treatment to prevent sudden death in the implantable cardioverter defibrillator era

The prevention of sudden death remains a key aspect of clinical management in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). For many years, amiodarone has been widely used to treat and prevent symptomatic atrial arrhythmias in patients with HCM, but its role in the prevention of potentially fatal ventricular arrhythmia has remained controversial. The publication of several observational studies examining the efficacy of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in patients with the disease has stimulated a re-evaluation of the drug's place in the management of HCM. This article reviews the literature on amiodarone therapy in HCM and discusses the indications for its use in the ICD era.

Ventricular tachycardia syndromes

Better understanding of the underlying mechanism and substrate of different VTs has made it possible to tailor treatment strategies properly. The advent of sophisticated device-based therapy and of more precise and effective catheter ablation approaches will expand clinicians' ability to gain control of this multifaceted arrhythmia syndrome.

[The clinical practice guidelines of the Sociedad Española de Cardiología on cardiomyopathies and myocarditis]

Myocardial diseases are a extraordinarily heterogeneous group of processes that only have in common the fact that they involve heart muscle and that they cause a wide spectrum of myocardial dysfunction. The approach of the management and treatment of the cardiomyopathies is a continuous matter of discussion because the vast majority of alternatives in this field have not been based on the best scientific possible evidence and, since except for the case of heart failure associated with dilated cardiomyopathy. The majority of different options have not been studied by means of large (or even small) randomized trials. Nevertheless, this chapter has tried to provide the reader with different approaches on how to deal with important clinical problems in dilated, hypertrophic and restrictive cardiomyopathies, and in myocarditis as well. For this, we have utilized the most relevant information found coupled with our best clinical judgment, although we admit that many of the clinical recommendations can be controversial.

Sudden cardiac death

SCD continues to be an important cause of death and morbidity. Despite expanding insight into the mechanisms causing SCD, the population at high risk is not being effectively identified. Although there is still much to do in the management phase of SCD (predicting the efficacy of various therapies), recent clinical trials have helped define the relative risks and benefits of therapies in preventing SCD. Trials are underway to determine whether treating other patient populations, including asymptomatic patients after MI, will improve survival rate. The approach to reducing mortality rate will always be multifaceted; primary prevention of coronary artery disease and prompt salvage of jeopardized myocardium are 2 important aspects of this approach. In addition to interventions for MI, such as myocardial revascularization when indicated, simple and easily administered therapies that are likely to remain the most effective prophylactic interventions are aspirin, ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, and cholesterol-lowering agents. However, the MADIT and AVID data clearly demonstrate a role for ICD therapy in a subgroup of patients who have VT/VF and are at risk of cardiac arrest. Even though the absolute magnitude of benefit associated with ICDs is still to be determined, the AVID study and other recent reports provide convincing evidence that patients who have VT/VF fare better with ICDs than with antiarrhythmic drug therapy. For the high-risk population described in this article, in addition to aggressive anti-ischemic and heart failure therapy, ICDs are now a mainstay of life-saving treatment. Still to be surmounted is the challenge of identifying patients who have nonischemic substrates and of providing them with the appropriate therapy. Guided by genetic studies and new insight into the mechanisms of such problems as congenital long QT syndrome, life-saving and life-enhancing therapies may soon be available for the management of SCD.

Survival after cardiac arrest or sustained ventricular tachycardia in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival of patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) after resuscitated ventricular fibrillation or syncopal sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT/VF) when treated with low dose amiodarone or implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs).

BACKGROUND

Prospective data on clinical outcome in patients with HCM who survive a cardiac arrest are limited, but studies conducted before the widespread use of amiodarone and/or ICD therapy suggest that over a third die within seven years from sudden cardiac death or progressive heart failure.

METHODS

Sixteen HCM patients with a history of VT/VF (nine male, age at VT/VF 19 +/- 8 years [range 10 to 36]) were studied. Syncopal sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation occurred during or immediately after exertion in eight patients and was the initial presentation in eight. One patient had disabling neurologic deficit after VT/VF. Before VT/VF, two patients had angina, four had syncope and six had a family history of premature sudden cardiac death. After VT/VF all patients were in New York Heart Association class I or II, three had nonsustained VT during ambulatory electrocardiography and 11 had an abnormal exercise blood pressure response. After VT/VF eight patients were treated with low dose amiodarone and six received an ICD. Prophylactic therapy was declined by two patients.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 6.1 +/- 4.0 years (range 0.5 to 14.5). Cumulative survival (death or ICD discharge) for the entire cohort was 59% at five years (95% confidence interval: 33% to 84%). Thirteen (81%) patients were alive at last follow-up. Two patients died suddenly while taking low dose amiodarone, and one died due to neurologic complications of his initial cardiac arrest. Three patients had one or more appropriate ICD discharges during follow-up; the times to first shock after ICD implantation were 23, 197 and 1,124 days.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that patients with HCM who survive an episode of VT/VF remain at risk for a recurrent event. Implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy appears to offer the best potential benefit regarding outcome.

[Sudden death in hypertrophic myocardiopathy]

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is the most common cause of sudden death in young individuals who are otherwise healthy. Risk of sudden death is highest in patients who are between 14 and 35 years old. Several mechanisms are involved in sudden death: ventricular arrhythmias, supraventricular arrhythmias leading to cardiac collapse, bradycardias and severe ischemia. Many studies have analyzed how to identify high risk patients. The factors that best identify high risk patients are: previous history of sudden death or syncope, induction in adults of sustained ventricular arrhythmias, the presence of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia in symptomatic patients, the presence of ischemia associated with hypotension in children, the presence of mutations in the beta-myosin heavy chain together with a family history of sudden death and a poor left ventricular ejection fraction. Risk stratification should be done on an individualized basis. In those patients in whom a high risk for sudden arrhythmic death is suspected, the only current effective treatment is the implantable defibrillator.

Comparison of Quality of Well-Being scale and NYHA functional status classification in patients with atrial fibrillation. New York Heart Association

BACKGROUND

There is an increased need to provide appropriate outcomes evaluations. Although designed as a clinical assessment tool, the New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification is often used as an outcome measure. In this study the performance of the NYHA classification is compared with that of the Quality of Well-being scale (QWB), a standard outcome instrument.

METHODS

Subjects from a clinical trial were administered both the NYHA classification and the QWB. Scores for patients with NYHA classification I, II, and III were compared by use of an ordinal regression model.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in mean QWB score by NYHA classification (p < 0.0001). However, each NYHA classification score was associated with a wide range of QWB scores, limiting the potential usefulness of the NYHA classification as an outcome measure.

CONCLUSIONS

The NYHA classification is not a sensitive measure of health-related quality of life, and its use as an outcome measure, although providing some insights, may result in misleading findings. The NYHA classification should not be used as the sole outcome measure.

Prognostic value of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia and the potential role of amiodarone treatment in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: assessment in an unselected non-referral based patient population

BACKGROUND

Amiodarone has been reported to reduce the likelihood of sudden death in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). However, data regarding the clinical course in HCM have traditionally come from selected referral populations biased toward assessment of high risk patients.

AIMS

To evaluate antiarrhythmic treatment for sudden death in an HCM population not subject to tertiary referral bias, closely resembling the true disease state present in the community.

METHODS

Cardiovascular mortality was assessed in relation to the occurrence of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) on 24 or 48 hour ambulatory Holter recording, a finding previously regarded as a marker for sudden death, particularly when the arrhythmia was frequent, repetitive or prolonged. 167 consecutive patients were analysed by multiple Holter ECG recordings (mean (SD) 157 (129) hours) and followed for a mean of 10 (5) years. Only patients with multiple repetitive NSVT were treated with amiodarone, and in relatively low. doses (220 (44) mg/day).

RESULTS

Nine HCM related deaths occurred: 8 were the consequence of congestive heart failure, but only 1 was sudden and unexpected. Three groups of patients were segregated based on their NSVT profile: group 1 (n = 39), multiple (> or = 2 runs) and repetitive bursts (on > or = 2 Holters) of NSVT, or prolonged runs of ventricular tachycardia, included 4 deaths due to heart failure; group 2 (n = 38), isolated infrequent bursts of NSVT, included 1 sudden death; group 3 (n = 90), without NSVT, included 4 heart failure deaths. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed no significant differences in survival between the three groups throughout follow up.

CONCLUSIONS

In an unselected patient population with HCM, isolated, non-repetitive bursts of NSVT were not associated with adverse prognosis and so this arrhythmia does not appear to justify chronic antiarrhythmic treatment. Amiodarone, administered in relatively low doses, did not carry an independent and additive risk for cardiac mortality. Amiodarone may have contributed to the absence of sudden cardiac death in patients believed to be at higher risk because of multiple repetitive NSVT.

The top ten fallacies of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia

Nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) continues to remain a subject of controversy. This is true despite a wealth of epidemiologic and basic/clinical laboratory findings that have accumulated during the past 2 decades. However, these data not only generate the impetus to conduct further research, but also provide compelling arguments against continued adherence to time honored precepts about NSVT that evolved since the inception of the "PVC Hypothesis," although never substantiated by rigorous scientific inquiry. This paper discusses the "top ten" fallacies of NSVT and details the data that support abandonment of them.

Arrhythmias in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias, particularly nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, and ventricular premature beats are a common finding in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Several investigations have demonstrated that nonsustained ventricular tachycardia on Holter monitoring is associated with an increased risk of sudden cardiac death. It has been a long lasting controversial discussion whether suppression of these arrhythmias with drugs, such as amiodarone is capable to reduce the incidence of sudden cardiac death. While recent studies have indicated that nonsustained ventricular tachycardia in asymptomatic patients without additional risk factors, such as a positive family history of sudden cardiac death or syncope should not be treated prophylactically with amiodarone. Symptomatic patients with sustained ventricular tachycardias and/or syncope related to ventricular arrhythmias should undergo ICD implantation. The implantation of an ICD in asymptomatic patients should be limited to those who have several risk factors for sudden cardiac death. It is questionable whether other risk stratifiers, such as programmed electrical stimulation may be helpful to identify asymptomatic patients who are at risk to die suddenly. Moreover, whether the demonstration of electrocardiogram fractionation during electrophysiological study is superior to the induction of sustained ventricular arrhythmias for risk stratification, needs further investigation.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: evaluation and treatment of patients at high risk for sudden death

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a heritable disease characterized by LV hypertrophy with markedly variable clinical, morphological, and genetic manifestations. It is the most common cause of sudden death in otherwise healthy young individuals. HCM patients often have disabling symptoms and are prone to arrhythmias. Frequently, there is associated LV systolic and diastolic dysfunction, LV outflow obstruction, and myocardial ischemia. Over the past decade, progress has been made in identifying patients who are at high risk for sudden death, in elucidating potential mechanisms of sudden death, and in defining therapeutic algorithms that may improve prognosis. It has also been possible to determine the genetic defect in some of the patients and to correlate clinical findings with the molecular defects. An exciting development has been the use of dual chamber pacemaker as an alternative to cardiac surgery to improve symptoms and relieve LV outflow obstruction.

Antiarrhythmic drug therapy for ventricular arrhythmias: current perspectives

Pharmacologic therapy for ventricular arrhythmias has undergone a remarkable change recently. Recognition of the importance of underlying structural heart disease on prognostic implications of ventricular arrhythmias has resulted in the refinement of the clinical classification of these arrhythmias. With refinement of techniques of risk stratification, it is now possible to identify patients ventricular arrhythmias at high risk for sudden death. Retrospective analyses of prior antiarrhythmic drug trials and new data from prospective randomized trials are now available and can more directly define the risks and benefits of antiarrhythmic therapy. Prevention of sudden death, reduction in total mortality, or improvement in symptoms remain the only benefits of antiarrhythmic drugs. With inclusion of total mortality as the major endpoint for assessment of pharmacologic interventions in high-risk patients, the potential for excess mortality due to antiarrhythmic agents is now recognized. The pharmacologic diversity of newly released antiarrhythmic agents and others under development has resulted in a re-evaluation of the traditional classification of these drugs. Multiple ongoing clinical trials will define the risks and benefits of antiarrhythmic therapy and other nonpharmacologic interventions in patients with ventricular arrhythmias.

Current approaches in patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias

The article has summarized the studies and ongoing trials looking at the significance and treatment of ventricular tachyarrhythmias. In most instances, the presence of these arrhythmias is associated with an increased risk of future arrhythmic events. Electrophysiologic studies are helpful in risk stratification in patients with coronary artery disease but can be misleading in the setting of dilated cardiomyopathy and often produce nonspecific results in patients with HCM. The need for an invasive electrophysiologic study is crucial in the diagnosis of certain ventricular arrhythmias that are amenable to cure with radiofrequency catheter ablation, such as idiopathic ventricular tachycardia and BBR-VT. The correct approach for patients with SVT not amenable to catheter ablation remains to be determined. In deciding whether to use a device or drug therapy, however, one should take into consideration the degree of left ventricular dysfunction and the overall health status of the patient. For example, device implantation clearly reduces sudden death in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction but may not change total mortality because these same patients may die of congestive heart failure. Device therapy might be more cost-effective for patients with less severe depression of left ventricular function.

Sudden cardiac death in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: from bench to bedside with an emphasis on genetic markers

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is the most common cause of death in the young, particularly in young competitive athletes. Death often occurs suddenly in asymptomatic, apparently healthy individuals. Several clinical parameters as well as genetic factors have been characterized that can identify those HCM patients who are at high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD). The clinical parameters that have some predictive values for SCD in HCM patients are the following: a prior history of SCD, a family history of SCD, history of syncope, symptomatic ventricular tachycardia on Holter monitoring, inducible ventricular tachycardia during electrophysiologic studies, and myocardial ischemia in children with HCM. Recent identification of mutations in the beta myosin heavy chain gene and genotype-phenotype correlation in HCM patients have shown that the beta myosin heavy chain mutations are also prognosticators in HCM families. Several mutations such as Arg403Gln and Arg719Gln are associated with a high incidence of SCD, while Leu908Val mutation is associated with a benign course and a low incidence of SCD in HCM families. Additional genetic factors such as a polymorphism in angiotensin-converting enzyme I gene may also contribute to a high incidence of SCD in HCM families. Identification and characterization of HCM patients at high risk for SCD provide the opportunity to render prophylactic therapeutic interventions, such as implantation of defibrillators, in these individuals.

Predicting and preventing sudden death from cardiac causes

Sudden cardiac death usually occurs secondary to a ventricular tachyarrhythmia. Even under ideal circumstances only 20% of patients who have an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survive to hospital discharge. Therefore, aggressive treatment and screening of high-risk patients are mandatory to improve survival rates. Risk stratification of high-risk patients, such as the post-myocardial infarction (MI) population, has been of limited value. Between 70% and 85% of "high-risk" post-MI patients, as defined by these screening tests, will not have a sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia over several years of follow-up. The use of beta-blockers and possibly amiodarone may have some benefit in reducing mortality in high-risk patients after an MI. Several ongoing trials are studying the use of serial drug testing, amiodarone, and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in reducing the incidence of sudden cardiac death in patients with potentially lethal ventricular arrhythmias. Although implantable cardioverter-defibrillators appear to be superior to antiarrhythmic drugs in reducing sudden cardiac death, total mortality may not be altered. In sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias, sotalol and amiodarone appear to be superior to other drugs in preventing arrhythmia recurrence. Ongoing trials, such as the Antiarrhythmic Drug versus Implantable Device (AVID) trial may define the best strategy in these high-risk patients.

Empiric use of amiodarone and sotalol

Several studies have demonstrated that class I antiarrhythmic drugs do not reduce, and may increase, sudden cardiac death mortality and total cardiac mortality. Because of this, alternative drug choices for antiarrhythmic therapy are necessary. Amiodarone has been demonstrated to be an important and effective antiarrhythmic agent, as has sotalol. The purpose of this article is to review the various indications and possible benefits of the empiric use of these 2 antiarrhythmic agents.

Nonsustained ventricular tachycardia: identification and management of high-risk patients

NSVT is common in normal persons and in patients with a variety of heart diseases. When present in patients with coronary artery disease, particularly after a recent myocardial infarction, it is associated with an increased risk of sudden and nonsudden cardiac death. However, its prognostic significance in patients with nonischemic heart disease, with the possible exception of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, remains controversial. In patients with coronary artery disease, certain diagnostic tools (e.g., determination of left ventricular function. PVS) help to identify low- and high-risk patients who may or may not benefit from antiarrhythmic treatment. There is no consensus at this point as to the best approach for identifying and treating high-risk patients. Ongoing clinical trials should provide important information on the roles of signal-averaged ECGs and PVS in the management of patients with NSVT and coronary artery disease. In the meantime, treatment should be individualized for each patient. beta-Blockers should probably be the first line of therapy to control symptoms. Asymptomatic potentially high-risk patients (i.e., those with LVEF < 40%) should be referred for enrollment in randomized controlled studies.

Influence of left ventricular hypertrophy and function on the occurrence of ventricular tachycardia in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Sixty-nine patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy were studied by 2-dimensional and Doppler echocardiography and 72-hour Holter monitoring to examine the relation between the degree of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy and dysfunction and the occurrence of ventricular tachycardia (VT). Episodes of nonsustained VT were detected in 20 patients (29%). Maximal wall thickness was not different between patients with (22 +/- 5 mm) and without (21 +/- 5 mm) VT. Total hypertrophy score, calculated as the sum of 10 segmental wall thicknesses, was also similar in both groups (157 +/- 22 and 153 +/- 32 mm, respectively; p = not significant). Furthermore, no significant differences were found between the 2 groups in LV end-diastolic dimension (41 +/- 7 vs 40 +/- 6 mm), fractional shortening (33 +/- 7 vs 34 +/- 10%) and left atrial size (40 +/- 10 vs 41 +/- 11 mm). An LV outflow tract gradient was detected in 25% of patients with and 35% without VT (p = not significant). One or more Doppler indexes of diastolic function were abnormal in 70% of patients, but no difference in any of these indexes was found between those with and without VT. In summary, the occurrence of VT in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is not related to the degree of LV hypertrophy, outflow tract gradient or dysfunction. This finding suggests a dissociation between the arrhythmogenic substrate and echocardiographic features of the disease.

Prognostic determinants in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Prospective evaluation of a therapeutic strategy based on clinical, Holter, hemodynamic, and electrophysiological findings

BACKGROUND

Patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) frequently have arrhythmias and hemodynamic abnormalities and are prone to sudden death and syncope. An important need exists for improved risk stratification and definition of appropriate investigation and therapy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The relation of 31 clinical, Holter, cardiac catheterization, and electrophysiological (EP) variables to subsequent cardiac events in 230 HCM patients was examined by multivariate analysis. Studies were for cardiac arrest (n = 32), syncope (n = 80), presyncope (n = 52), ventricular tachycardia (VT) on Holter (n = 36), a strong family history of sudden death (n = 9), and palpitations (n = 21). Nonsustained VT on Holter was present in 115 patients (50%). Sustained ventricular arrhythmia was induced in 82 patients (36%). Seventeen cardiac events (eight sudden deaths, one cardiac arrest, and eight syncope with defibrillator discharges) occurred during a follow-up of 28 +/- 19 months. The 1-year and 5-year event-free rates were 99% and 79%, respectively. Two variables were significant independent predictors of subsequent events: sustained ventricular arrhythmia induced at EP study (beta, 3.5; p = 0.002) and a history of cardiac arrest or syncope (beta, 2.9; p less than 0.05). Only two of 66 patients without symptoms of impaired consciousness had a cardiac event (3-year event-free rate, 97%). In contrast, nonsustained VT on Holter was associated with a worse prognosis only in patients with symptoms of impaired consciousness: 11 of 79 symptomatic patients with VT on Holter (14%) had events versus only four of 85 symptomatic patients without VT on Holter (5%) (p = 0.057). Notably, none of 51 patients without symptoms of impaired consciousness in whom VT was not induced at EP study had a cardiac event.

CONCLUSIONS

In HCM, VT on Holter is of benign prognostic significance in the absence of symptoms of impaired consciousness and inducible VT, and sustained VT induced at EP study, especially when associated with cardiac arrest or syncope, identifies a subgroup at high risk for subsequent cardiac events.

Amiodarone. An overview of its pharmacological properties, and review of its therapeutic use in cardiac arrhythmias

Amiodarone, originally developed over 20 years ago, is a potent antiarrhythmic drug with the actions of all antiarrhythmic drug classes. It has been successfully used in the treatment of symptomatic and life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias and symptomatic supraventricular arrhythmias. In patients with left ventricular dysfunction amiodarone does not usually produce any clinically significant cardiodepression and the drug has relatively high antiarrhythmic efficacy. Preliminary studies indicate that amiodarone may have a beneficial effect on mortality and survival in certain groups of patients with ventricular arrhythmias, an action probably related to both its antiarrhythmic and antifibrillatory effects. The adverse effect profile of amiodarone is diverse, involving the cardiac, thyroid, pulmonary, hepatic, gastrointestinal, ocular, neurological and dermatological systems. Interstitial pneumonitis and hepatitis are potentially fatal, but the vast majority of adverse events are less serious, and some may be dose dependent. Pretreatment monitoring, regular assessments and the use of minimum effective doses are, therefore, necessary. Thus, with appropriate monitoring to control its well recognised adverse effects amiodarone has an important place as an effective 'broad spectrum' antiarrhythmic drug which has, so far, been used when other treatments have proved ineffective. More recent preliminary data also suggest that it may also have a beneficial effect in the prevention of sudden death in some patients.

Value of electrophysiologic studies in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy treated with amiodarone

The relation of electrophysiologic effects of amiodarone to long-term outcome was studied in 35 patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HC). Indications for electrophysiologic studies were: cardiac arrest (n = 3), syncope/presyncope (n = 27) and asymptomatic ventricular tachycardia (VT) (n = 5). Twenty-eight patients (80%) had VT, 3 (9%) atrial tachycardia and 3 (9%) paroxysmal atrial fibrillation during 24-hour Holter monitoring. The studies were repeated after a total amiodarone dose of 58 +/- 122 g and during a maintenance median daily dose of 400 mg. Amiodarone abolished paroxysmal atrial arrhythmias in all 6 patients. However, it caused marked atrioventricular nodal conduction abnormality in 3 patients and heart block or marked HV interval prolongation (to greater than or equal to 100 ms) in 4 patients. Sustained VT was induced in 26 patients (74%) at baseline study and in 23 patients (66%) taking amiodarone therapy. With amiodarone, VT was no longer inducible or was more difficult to induce in 11 patients (31%), and the drug abolished VT during Holter monitoring in all patients. However, VT was easier to induce with amiodarone or was induced only with amiodarone in 18 (51%) patients. Amiodarone significantly slowed the rate of induced VT (from 248 +/- 29 to 214 +/- 37 beats/min, p less than 0.001). This was associated with a change in its morphology from polymorphic to monomorphic VT in 7 patients. During a follow up of 18 +/- 14 months (range 2 to 56), amiodarone was discontinued because of adverse effects in 8 patients (23%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)