Impact of Z score system on the management of coronary artery lesions in Kawasaki disease

Diagnosis of coronary artery abnormalities in Kawasaki disease: recent guidelines and z score systems

Kawasaki disease, an acute systemic vasculitis affecting children, is the leading cause of acquired heart disease in developed countries. This vasculitis has a predilection for the coronary artery, and coronary artery abnormalities are the main criteria for its diagnosis. The diagnosis of coronary abnormalities has historically been based on dichotomous criteria, but recent guidelines have accepted the body surface area-adjusted z score system to define coronary abnormalities and classify coronary artery aneurysms. Z score systems have improved risk classifications of coronary aneurysms and improved correlations with clinical prognosis. However, the discrepancy of calculated z scores according to the formula has been noticed in the application of the z score system, which is possibly related to the diagnosis of coronary artery abnormalities. This variability was greater in larger coronary aneurysm dimensions. A careful choice of the z score formula and its consistent use is needed in clinical applications.

Practical Workflow for Cardiovascular Assessment and Follow-Up in Kawasaki Disease Based on Expert Opinion

BACKGROUND

Approximately 25% of the patients with a history of Kawasaki disease (KD) develop coronary artery pathology if left untreated, with coronary artery aneurysms (CAA) as an early hallmark. Depending on the severity of CAAs, these patients are at risk of myocardial ischemia, infarction and sudden death. In order to reduce cardiac complications it is crucial to accurately identify patients with coronary artery pathology by an integrated cardiovascular program, tailored to the severity of the existing coronary artery pathology.

METHODS

The development of this practical workflow for the cardiovascular assessment of KD patients involve expert opinions of pediatric cardiologists, infectious disease specialists and radiology experts with clinical experience in a tertiary KD reference center of more than 1000 KD patients. Literature was analyzed and an overview of the currently most used guidelines is given.

CONCLUSIONS

We present a patient-specific step-by-step, integrated cardiovascular follow-up approach based on expert opinion of a multidisciplinary panel with expertise in KD.