4.4 Article

Myocardial function in patients with Shwachman-Diamond syndrome:: Aspects to consider before stem cell transplantation

Journal

PEDIATRIC BLOOD & CANCER
Volume 51, Issue 4, Pages 461-467

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pbc.21686

Keywords

bone marrow failure; cardiology; cardiotoxicity; neutropenia; stem cell transplantation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Early studies have suggested increased risk of fatal cardiac complications in infants with Shwachman-Diamond syndrome (SDS), an inherited bone marrow failure syndrome. Patients undergoing stern cell transplantation (STC) have appeared susceptible to organ toxicity, including cardiac involvement. Procedure. This study assessed anatomical and functional features of the heart in SDS. Eight patients (mean age 24.1 years, range 7-37 years, seven males) with SDS and confirmed SBDS Mutations were prospectively assessed for cardiac anatomy, myocardial wall properties, and systolic and diastolic function. The Study protocol included conventional echocardiography (n = 8) complemented by exercise Tissue-Doppler echocardiography (n = 7), and by MRI (n = 6). Results. No abnormalities in cardiac anatomy or function were observed in baseline clinical assessment, EKG, or conventional echocardiographic and MRI measurements. Myocardial structure and left ventricular (LV) mass were normal. The maximum isovolumic acceleration (IVA) value during exercise in Tissue-Doppler was significantly lower (P < 0.001), and the right ventricular (RV) ejection fraction (P=0.02) and peak filling rate (PFR, P=0.008) at rest in MRI were higher in patients. Conclusions. Children and Young adults With SIDS and Mutations in SBDS had normal cardiac anatomy and myocardial structure. Subtle RV diastolic function alterations at rest and depressed LV contractility exercise were observed. Further Studies are warranted to evaluate the clinical importance of these findings.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available