Competitive athletes with cardiovascular disease--the case of Nicholas Knapp

Do Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators Really Belong on the Athlete Field?

High-risk athletes with implanted cardioverter-defibrillators who are competing in intense sports represent a controversial issue in cardiovascular medicine. Such devices have the capability to protect patients with a variety of cardiovascular diseases from sudden death and have aborted potentially lethal events during competitive sports but they can also lead to adverse clinical consequences for athletes with implants and other participants. In conclusion, clinicians and athletes should consider the data presented here in making prudent and informed recommendations regarding the eligibility of this patient group with implanted cardioverter-defibrillators for intense competitive sports.

Athletic Activity for Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy and Other Inherited Cardiovascular Diseases: JACC Focus Seminar 3/4

As explored throughout this JACC Focus Seminar series, participation in regular exercise offers significant positive benefits for cardiovascular health. However, patients with underlying inherited cardiovascular diseases, such as hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, have historically been restricted from sports participation because of the risk of sudden cardiac death. Over the last decade, new data has challenged this restrictive approach. Today, the notion of individualized, patient-centered shared decision-making is being progressively adopted to guide patients with an inherited cardiovascular disease to decide if they can undertake regular exercise, or even if they can participate in competitive sports. Here in this part 3 of a 4-part seminar series, we focus on these concepts and recent data with respect to exercise and the heart in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and other inherited cardiovascular diseases, with particular emphasis on participation in recreational and competitive sports for these individuals.

Experiences of Athletes with Arrhythmogenic Cardiac Conditions in Returning to Play

Background

Recommendations for return to play (RTP) for athletes with genetic (or congenital) heart diseases (GHD) predisposing to sudden cardiac death (SCD) have evolved from an initially paternalistic and conservative approach, to supporting a more flexible approach to decision-making. The experiences of athletes and their families during the RTP process are unknown.

Objective

To understand current RTP processes.

Methods

We administered a mixed-methods telephone interview combining quantitative and qualitative components to 30 athletes with a GHD who had RTP, and 23 parents. Participants were identified from the Yale ICD Sports registry and Mayo Clinic’s Windland Smith Rice Genetic Heart Rhythm Clinic. Qualitative data were analyzed using a grounded theory approach to identify common themes.

Results

Most common diagnoses were long QT syndrome and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and most common sports, soccer, basketball, and football. Twenty-three athletes encountered ≥1 perceived barrier(s) to RTP: 17 were restricted by their first cardiologist; 6 were required to meet with school administrators, 4 signed waivers, and 3 hired lawyers. Common themes expressed by athletes and their parents were frustration with poor communication, perceived lack of physician knowledge of their diagnosis, and unilateral, paternalistic decision-making, as well as cynicism that physicians and schools were primarily concerned with liability. After RTP, 26 athletes had some form of emergency action plan, although responsibility was often left to the family.

Conclusion

Many perceived barriers exist for athletes with GHD who wish to RTP after their diagnoses. Shared decision-making from the onset is critical for RTP.

Recommendations for participation in leisure-time physical activity and competitive sports in patients with arrhythmias and potentially arrhythmogenic conditions: Part 1: Supraventricular arrhythmias. A position statement of the Section of Sports Cardiology and Exercise from the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), both associations of the European Society of Cardiology

Symptoms attributable to arrhythmias are frequently encountered in clinical practice. Cardiologists and sport physicians are required to identify high-risk individuals harbouring such conditions and provide appropriate advice regarding participation in regular exercise programmes and competitive sport. The three aspects that need to be considered are: (a) the risk of life-threatening arrhythmias by participating in sports; (b) control of symptoms due to arrhythmias that are not life-threatening but may hamper performance and/or reduce the quality of life; and (c) the impact of sports on the natural progression of the underlying arrhythmogenic condition. In many cases, there is no unequivocal answer to each aspect and therefore an open discussion with the athlete is necessary, in order to reach a balanced decision. In 2006 the Sports Cardiology and Exercise Section of the European Association of Preventive Cardiology published recommendations for participation in leisure-time physical activity and competitive sport in individuals with arrhythmias and potentially arrhythmogenic conditions. More than a decade on, these recommendations are partly obsolete given the evolving knowledge of the diagnosis, management and treatment of these conditions. The present document presents a combined effort by the Sports Cardiology and Exercise Section of the European Association of Preventive Cardiology and the European Heart Rhythm Association to offer a comprehensive overview of the most updated recommendations for practising cardiologists and sport physicians managing athletes with supraventricular arrhythmias, and provides pragmatic advice for safe participation in recreational physical activities, as well as competitive sport at amateur and professional level. A companion text on recommendations in athletes with ventricular arrhythmias, inherited arrhythmogenic conditions, pacemakers and implantable defibrillators is published as Part 2 in Europace.

Return to play with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: are we moving too fast? A critical review

The diagnosis of a potentially lethal cardiovascular disease in a young athlete presents a complex dilemma regarding athlete safety, patient autonomy, team or institutional risk tolerance and medical decision-making. Consensus cardiology recommendations previously supported the ‘blanket’ disqualification of athletes with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) from competitive sport. More recently, epidemiological studies examining the relative contribution of HCM as a cause of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in young athletes and reports from small cohorts of older athletes with HCM that continue to exercise have fueled debate whether it is safe to play with HCM. Shared decision-making is endorsed within the sports cardiology community in which athletes can make an informed decision about treatment options and potentially elect to continue competitive sports participation. This review critically examines the available evidence relevant to sports eligibility decisions in young athletes diagnosed with HCM. Histopathologically, HCM presents an unstable myocardial substrate that is vulnerable to ventricular tachyarrhythmias during exercise. Studies support that young age and intense competitive sports are risk factors for SCD in patients with HCM. We provide an estimate of annual mortality based on our understanding of disease prevalence and the incidence of HCM-related SCD in different athlete populations. Adolescent and young adult male athletes and athletes participating in a higher risk sport such as basketball, soccer and American football exhibit a greater risk. This review explores the potential harms and benefits of sports disqualification in athletes with HCM and details the challenges and limitations of shared decision-making when all parties may not agree.

Sport Participation in Patients with Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Athletes diagnosed with cardiovascular disease may receive implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). Until recently, there were no data describing the safety of return to play for athletes receiving an ICD, and consensus recommendations restricted ICD patients to competitive sports no more vigorous than bowling or golf.

RECENT FINDINGS

The ICD Sports Registry prospectively followed 440 athletes who continued sports participation after receiving an ICD, for up to 4 years. While many received shocks, both appropriate and inappropriate, during competition or practice, as well as during other physical activity or rest, there were no failures to defibrillate and no injuries related to arrhythmia or shock during sports. Recent subanalyses as described below have focused on how best to program the ICD, and on the younger subgroup including interscholastic athletes. Based on these data, the most recent consensus statement from the AHA/ACC on athletic eligibility now describes sports participation with an ICD as a IIB recommendation, "may be considered".

Empowerment of athletes with cardiac disorders: a new paradigm

Athletes with cardiac disorders frequently pose an ethical and medical dilemma to physicians assessing their eligibility to participate in sport. In recent decades, patient empowerment has been gaining increasing recognition in clinical decision-making. Empowerment is a process through which people are involved over the decisions and actions that affect their own lives. In the context of a cardiac disorder, empowerment means giving an athlete the chance to participate in the decision about whether or not to remain active in competition. Three models of treatment decision-making are described in this article, with progressive levels of empowerment: the paternalistic model (the athlete has a passive role), the shared-decision making model (both athlete and physician participate in the decision), and the informed-decision making (the decision is made by the athlete while the role of the physician is solely to provide information). This article critically discusses the issues involved in disqualification of athletes with cardiovascular disorders and suggests possible ways of incorporating patient empowerment in potentially career-ending decisions. The authors propose a model of empowerment, which gives patients the opportunity to choose how much, and if, they would like to be involved in the decision-making process.

Call for joint informed consent in athletes with inherited cardiac conditions

Informed consent is of the utmost importance, especially in complex clinical situations where patients may be exposed to a life-threatening risk. A particularly complex example is the eligibility of competitive athletes with inherited cardiac conditions on medical grounds, especially when the risk is low or unquantifiable. The rationale and benefits of a joint informed consent for athletes to compete with potentially life-threatening cardiac conditions are discussed in this manuscript.

Return to play in the athlete with cardiac disease: who decides and what is the protocol?

Improved public awareness and advances in medical diagnostics have resulted in the development of criteria to determine eligibility or disqualification for the athlete with cardiovascular abnormalities. Simultaneously, protocols have been developed for athletes with concussion or orthopaedic injuries to guide team physicians and consultants in return-to-play decisions. However, there are currently inadequate data to allow the development of such protocols for athletes with cardiovascular abnormalities who have undergone treatment. Further complicating the decision process is the designation of the team physician as the ultimate authority in making return-to-play decisions - where the team physician often is an employee of the team and supports the team's goal and players as well as the individual athlete. This review will discuss the ethical dilemma of the team physician and the role of the cardiovascular consultant. Following this, current data and practices regarding return to play will be discussed for the following conditions or diagnoses: following catheter ablation for supraventricular tachycardia; following pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation; unexplained syncope; and the athlete with a genetic mutation in the absence of any phenotype of associated disease. These recommendations will undoubtedly continue to evolve and improve and should be considered at this time as a point of departure.

A legal perspective on athlete screening and disqualification

Physicians participate in the screening, routine medical supervision, and disqualification of student-athletes. In doing so, they should understand that eligibility/disqualification decisions inevitably have associated liability issues. It is the responsibility of physicians to take the lead role in the student-athlete medical assessment process to allow for optimum safety in sports programmes. The first duty of the physician is to protect the health and well-being of the student-athlete. However, because there is potential liability associated with the screening/disqualification process, physicians are wise to develop sound and reasonable strategies that are in strict compliance with the standard of care. This article focusses on cardiac screening and disqualification for participation in sports.

Historical Perspectives on Sudden Deaths in Young Athletes With Evolution over 35 Years

Sudden death in young competitive athletes has become a highly visible and substantial issue within cardiovascular medicine of interest both to the general public and to the practicing community. At this time, it is instructive to revisit the evolution of this clinical problem over the past 35 years starting with introduction into the public and medical consciousness by the unexpected sudden deaths of 2 college basketball players within 8 weeks of each other in 1976, 1 with Marfan syndrome and the other with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Subsequently, over the next years, a number of elite athletes died suddenly, raising public visibility and awareness of these tragic events: Len Bias, "Pistol" Pete Maravich, Hank Gathers, Reggie Lewis, Kori Stringer, Jason Collier, and Thomas Herrion. Intense interest in these and many other athlete deaths has led to a considerable understanding regarding the demographics, incidence, and causes of these deaths, which include a variety of genetic and/or congenital cardiovascular diseases (most commonly hypertrophic cardiomyopathy), blunt trauma, commotio cordis, and sickle cell trait. Ultimately, initiatives emerged creating consensus guidelines for disqualification versus eligibility decisions, and preparticipation screening to detect unsuspected cardiac abnormalities. This journey of now >3 decades has generated voluminous data and even controversy, but continues to hold great interest in clinical scientists, medical practitioners, and the general public.

National Athletic Trainers' Association position statement: Preparticipation physical examinations and disqualifying conditions

OBJECTIVE

To present athletic trainers with recommendations for the content and administration of the preparticipation physical examination (PPE) as well as considerations for determining safe participation in sports and identifying disqualifying conditions.

BACKGROUND

Preparticipation physical examinations have been used routinely for nearly 40 years. However, considerable debate exists as to their efficacy due to the lack of standardization in the process and the lack of conformity in the information that is gathered. With the continuing rise in sports participation at all levels and the growing number of reported cases of sudden death in organized athletics, the sports medicine community should consider adopting a standardized process for conducting the PPE to protect all parties.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations are provided to equip the sports medicine community with the tools necessary to conduct the PPE as effectively and efficiently as possible using available scientific evidence and best practices. In addition, the recommendations will help clinicians identify those conditions that may threaten the health and safety of participants in organized sports, may require further evaluation and intervention, or may result in potential disqualification.

[Sport for pacemaker patients]

Sport activity is an important issue in many patients with a pacemaker either because they performed sport activities before pacemaker implantation to reduce the cardiovascular risk or to improve the course of an underlying cardiovascular disease (e.g. coronary artery disease, heart failure) by sports. Compared to patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) the risks from underlying cardiovascular disease (e.g. ischemia, heart failure), arrhythmia, lead dysfunction or inappropriate therapy are less important or absent. Sport is contraindicated in dyspnea at rest, acute heart failure, new complex arrhythmia, acute myocarditis and acute myocardial infarction, valvular disease with indications for intervention and surgery and comorbidities which prevent physical activity. Patients with underlying cardiovascular disease (including hypertension) should preferably perform types and levels of physical activity that are aerobic (with dynamic exercise) such as running, swimming, cycling instead of sport with high anaerobic demands and high muscular workload. In heart failure, studies demonstrated advantages of isometric sport that increases the amount of muscle, thereby preventing cardiac cachexia. Sport with a risk of blows to the chest or physical contact (e.g. boxing, rugby, martial arts) should be avoided. Implantation, programming and follow-up should respect specific precautions to allow optimal physical activity with a pacemaker including implantation of bipolar leads on the side contralateral to the dominant hand, individual programming of the upper sensor and tracking rate and regular exercise testing.

Can we prevent sudden cardiac death in young athletes: the debate about preparticipation sports screening

All high school athletes in the United States require a preparticipation screening examination. The American Heart Association recommends a focused history and physical examination. The European Society of Cardiology recommends that all examinations include an electrocardiogram (ECG). We review the risks and costs of screening, discuss legal ramifications and analyse the ethical implications of these considerations. There are too many unknown about ECG screening to require it as routine testing for all high school athletes.

CONCLUSION

Doctors must inform young athletes and their parents about the option of ECG screening and about the debate over its efficacy. Patients and parents may then choose to have an ECG or not. Mandatory universal screening is not warranted at this time.

Possible mechanisms of sudden cardiac death in top athletes: a basic cardiac electrophysiological point of view

Sudden death among athletes is very rare (1:50,000-1:100,000 annually) but it is still 2-4 times more frequent than in the age-matched control population and attracts significant media attention. We propose a mechanism underlying sudden cardiac death in athletes that does not relate to myocardial ischemia but is based on repolarization abnormalities due to potassium channel downregulation and can also be best explained by the concurrent presence of several factors such as cardiac hypertrophy (athlete's heart), and/or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, increased sympathetic tone, genetic defects, drugs, doping agents, food, or dietary ingredients. These factors together can increase the repolarization inhomogeneity of the heart ("substrate") and an otherwise harmless extrasystole ("trigger") occurring with a very unfortunate timing may sometimes induce life-threatening arrhythmias. The effective and possible prevention of sudden cardiac death requires the development of novel cost effective cardiac electrophysiological screening methods. Athletes identified by these tests as individuals at higher proarrhythmic risk should then be subjected to more costly genetic tests in order to uncover possible underlying genetic causes for alterations in ionic channel structure and/or function.

Contemporary management of vascular complications associated with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome

OBJECTIVES

There has been debate regarding the safety of performing elective procedures in patients with vascular manifestations associated with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS). The purpose of this study was to review the surgical management and clinical outcomes of EDS patients undergoing vascular procedures at a tertiary medical center with multimodality expertise in connective tissue disorders.

METHODS

All patients with EDS undergoing endovascular and open vascular procedures at a single-institution academic medical center from 1994 to 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical data were evaluated including patient demographics, length of stay (LOS), and mortality outcomes during hospital course and long-term follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 40 patients with EDS were identified, including individuals diagnosed with classic (n = 15), hypermobility (n = 16), and vascular (n = 9) types of EDS. These patients collectively underwent 45 endovascular and 18 open procedures for vascular disease during the time period, including embolization (n = 37), angioplasty (n = 8), arterial bypass (n = 5), and aortic aneurysm repair (n = 13). All cases were performed electively, except for one (2%) urgent endovascular and one (5%) emergent open procedure. Endovascular procedures were associated with a median LOS (interquartile range [IQR]) of 2 (1 to 3) days with no procedure-related mortality or in-hospital deaths among all EDS types, whereas open vascular procedures had median LOS (IQR) of 6 (5 to 8) days with one (6%) in-hospital death occurring in a vascular EDS patient. Survival free of any complication at 5 years was 85% and 54% following endovascular and open procedures, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The elective surgical management of vascular disorders in EDS patients using open and endovascular procedures has been associated with good outcomes. Our results suggest that vascular interventions in these EDS patients can be safely performed and should not be withheld until rupture or acute symptoms arise.

Return-to-play decisions in athletes with cardiac conditions

Many sets of guidelines written by experts in their fields can assist sports medicine physicians to make return-to-play decisions for athletes with known or suspected cardiac conditions. These guidelines can be divided into pre-participation screening guidelines, such as the 2007 American Heart Association (AHA) 12-element screening examination, and specific recommendations for those with heart disease or symptoms. Several important documents fall into the latter category. Among these are the 36th Bethesda Guidelines, the European Society of Cardiology Guidelines, the AHA Consensus Document for Young People with Genetic Conditions, the Heart Rhythm Society Guidelines, and the Guidelines for Masters Athletes. Guidelines are designed to enhance the sports medicine physician's probability of detecting heart disease and making wise participation and return-to-play decisions in athletes with high-risk cardiac conditions, such as hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, anomalous coronary artery, myocarditis, and valvular heart disease. Guidelines also aid in writing exercise prescriptions for those deemed too high risk for sports participation. Because the guidelines may not be entirely consistent on all topics, or based on opinion rather than research evidence, many cases require additional input from a cardiologist or electrophysiologist. Guidelines address not only specific disease entities, but also how corrective surgery, ablations, implantable defibrillators, or drug therapy can influence return-to-play decisions. They are updated as new studies become available to provide physicians with the most up-to-date information.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and other causes of sudden cardiac death in young competitive athletes, with considerations for preparticipation screening and criteria for disqualification

Cardiovascular disease is the most frequent cause of death in young athletes, and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is the single most common condition responsible for these tragedies. Detection of diseases such as HCM can be achieved in general athlete populations through preparticipation screening, and most effectively if testing with electrocardiography or echocardiography is incorporated into the process. Criteria for disqualification and eligibility, based on identified cardiovascular abnormalities, are available in consensus panel guidelines for both United States and European athletes. Removal from intense training and competition is recommended for athletes with HCM, some of whom may ultimately be judged to be at unacceptably high risk for sudden death and eligible for prophylactic defibrillator implantation.

Coronary anomalies: Cardiac CT evaluation of the symptomatic adult athlete

Cardiac CT has become widely available as a diagnostic test. It is noninvasive, low risk (for contrast allergies), quick, and highly sensitive for identifying the coronary origins and course. Two coronary anomalies, the left main artery from the right sinus of Valsalva, and the right coronary artery originating from the left sinus, have been associated both with myocardial ischemia and sudden cardiac death when they course between the aorta and pulmonary arteries. These anomalies can go undetected into adulthood. The yield of noninvasive exercise testing is low. In the past, the ability to demonstrate these anomalies depended on a high index of suspicion and an aggressive invasive work-up with cardiac catheterization. Now cardiac CT can demonstrate these anomalies with ease and facilitate appropriate treatment.