The fate of acute myocarditis between spontaneous improvement and evolution to dilated cardiomyopathy: a review

Appropriate use of wearable defibrillators with multiparametric evaluation to avoid unnecessary defibrillator implantation

INTRODUCTION

Wearable cardioverter-defibrillators (WCD) have emerged as a valuable tool in the management of patients at risk for life-threatening arrhythmias. These devices offer a non-invasive and temporary solution, providing continuous monitoring and the potential for prompt defibrillation when needed. In this study, we explore the use of WCD and evaluate arrhythmic events through comprehensive monitoring.

METHODS

From November 2022 to May 2024, we conducted an outpatient follow-up of 41 patients receiving WCD. Regular check-ups, remote monitoring and comprehensive echocardiography were performed to optimise a tailored therapy.

RESULTS

The average age of the patients was 59.2.4±16.5 years, with 78% being male. Among the cohort, 54% had hypertension, 41% were smokers and 66% had dyslipidaemia, while 27% were diabetic. WCD was assigned according to the Italian Association of Hospital Cardiologists position paper focussing on the appropriate use of WCD and European Society of Cardiology guidelines on ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death: 24 (58%) patients had a de novo diagnosis of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, 11 (27%) patients had a recent acute coronary syndrome and ejection fraction <35%, 3 (7%) patients had a cardiac electronic device extraction and 3 (7%) patients had myocarditis with features of electrical instability. The average follow-up was 62±38 days according to specific aetiology, with a daily wearing time of 22.7±1.3 hours. No device interventions were recorded. At the end of the follow-up period, 15 patients still required an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). Among these, 12 patients (29%) underwent ICD implantation. Two patients (5%) declined the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of WCD for patients at high risk of arrhythmias allowed to optimise therapy and limit the indications for ICD. Inappropriate implantation of ICD was avoided in 69% of patients who received WCD. The device showed a good safety profile, low incidence of device interventions and adequate patients' adherence to WCD use.

Primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator use in non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy based on arrhythmic risk stratification and left ventricular reverse remodeling prediction

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) and significant ventricular arrhythmias in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) have been markedly reduced over the last couple of decades as a result of the advances in pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment. Primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) plays an important role in the treatment of patients at risk of SCD caused by ventricular arrhythmias. However, the arrhythmic risk stratification in patients with DCM remains extremely challenging, and the decision for primary prevention ICD implantation based on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) solely appears to be insufficient. This review provides an update on current evidence for primary prevention ICD implantation, arrhythmic risk stratification, and left ventricular reverse remodeling (LVRR) prediction in patients with DCM in addition to most recent guideline recommendations for primary prevention ICD implantation in DCM patients and a proposed multiparametric algorithm based on arrhythmic risk stratification and left ventricular reverse remodeling (LVRR) prediction to better identify patients who are likely to benefit from primary prevention ICD.

Clinical presentation and cardiac imaging findings in patient cases of perimyocarditis and pericarditis with a temporal association to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

Aims

We aimed to investigate and present cases of perimyocarditis and pericarditis verified by cardiovascular resonance (CMR) imaging in patients with a strong temporal association to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. We sought to describe the clinical presentation including coronary artery angiography, CMR, transthoracic echocardiography, blood samples, electrocardiography, and symptoms.

Methods

We included 10 patients admitted with chest pain shortly after vaccination for SARS-CoV-2, who were diagnosed with pericarditis or perimyocarditis by CMR. We reviewed the CMR, echocardiography, electrocardiography, blood samples, coronary artery angiography, vital signs and medical history. The updated Lake Louise Criteria were used to determine the diagnosis by CMR.

Results

Eight patients had perimyocarditis and two patients had pericarditis. The mean age was 22 ± 5 years (range 16 to 31 years), 90% were male. The median time from vaccination to hospital admission was 4 days (range 2 to 28 days). Admissions were seen after vaccination with three different SARS-CoV-2 vaccine manufacturers. Nine Patients had ST-elevation on the initial electrocardiography. Peak troponins varied from 357 to 23,547 ng/l, with a median of 4,304 ng/l. Two patients had an LVEF <50% on echocardiography and four patients had left ventricular global longitudinal strain values <18%. CMR revealed preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), although one patient had decreased LVEF on CMR. The T1 and T2 mapping values were increased in all patients. Of the 8 patients with perimyocarditis, all patients had signs of myocardial injury in the lateral segments of the left ventricle.

Conclusions

This case series of 10 patients supports the emerging evidence of an association between vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 and perimyocarditis and pericarditis, especially in young males. The temporal association was seen after vaccines from three different manufacturers. Imaging data from echocardiography and CMR displayed normal to mildly impaired cardiac function, usually with a mild disease course.

Mortality and ventricular arrhythmia after acute myocarditis: a nationwide registry-based follow-up study

Objective

Incidence and severity of acute myocarditis vary significantly in previous reports and there is a lack of epidemiological studies on the short-term risks of mortality, heart failure and ventricular arrhythmias in patients with acute myocarditis. Therefore, study aims were to examine 90-day risks of mortality, heart failure (HF) and ventricular arrhythmias in patients with acute myocarditis in comparison to age-matched and sex-matched background population controls.

Methods

In this nationwide register-based follow-up study of patients hospitalised with myocarditis between 2002 and 2018 in Denmark, 90-day risks of all-cause mortality, HF, ventricular arrhythmias (ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation (VF)), cardiac arrest and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation were compared with age-matched and sex-matched controls from the background population (1:5 matching). Absolute risks standardised to the age, sex and comorbidity distribution of the entire study population were derived from multivariable Cox regression.

Results

A total of 2523 patients hospitalised with myocarditis were included. Median age was 48 years (Q1–Q3: 30–69) and 67.7% were men. Comorbidity burden was more pronounced among patients with myocarditis relative to controls. Standardised 90-day all-cause mortality risk was 4.9% for patients with acute myocarditis versus 0.3% for controls (p<0.001). Ninety-day standardised risks for other endpoints were 7.5% versus 0.1% for HF, 1.9% versus <0.1% for VF/VF/arrest risk and 1.6% versus <0.1% for ICD implantation (all p<0.001).

Conclusions

In this large nationwide register-based follow-up study, patients hospitalised with myocarditis had significantly higher 90-day risks of all-cause mortality, HF, ventricular arrhythmias, cardiac arrest and ICD implantation compared with background population controls.

Myocarditis: early biopsy allows for tailored regenerative treatment

BACKGROUND AND METHODS

Myocarditis and inflammatory cardiomyopathies can be caused by infections, drugs, toxic substances, and autoimmune diseases. We present their clinical features, diagnostic evaluation, treatment, and prognosis on the basis of a selective review of the literature, current expert opinion, and our own clinical experience.

RESULTS

The pathological mechanisms that are accessible to treatment lie at the cellular and molecular levels and generally give rise to nonspecific disease manifestations. Specific treatment is possible only on the basis of a standardized diagnostic evaluation of a biopsy specimen, rather than clinical examination alone. Therapeutic decisions must be based on the results of thorough myocardial biopsy studies while taking account of the individual patient's clinical course. Moreover, treatment can help only if a treatable cause is present (e.g., a viral infection, an inflammatory process, or cardiodepressive antibodies), and only if the myocardium still has regenerative potential. Once irreversible myocardial injury has occurred-for example, if the diagnosis of post-infectious or post-inflammatory dilated cardiomyopathy has been missed until it is too late-then the development or progression of heart failure in the long term can no longer be prevented.

CONCLUSION

Recent studies have shown that specific treatment can help patients with viral, inflammatory, or autoimmune cardiomyopathy that has been precisely characterized by means of a myocardial biopsy. More randomized trials with larger patient cohorts are needed for further optimization of treatment.