4.5 Article

Eisenmenger syndrome and long-term survival in patients with Down syndrome and congenital heart disease

Journal

HEART
Volume 102, Issue 19, Pages 1552-1557

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2016-309437

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. EMAH Stiftung Karla Voellm, Krefeld
  2. Competence Network for Congenital Heart Defects
  3. Federal Ministry of Education and Research [01GI0601]
  4. DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To characterise patients with trisomy 21 (Down syndrome, DS) based on the data of the German National Register for Congenital Heart Defects, to identify changes in the availability of surgical therapy over time and to analyse the impact of these changes on developing Eisenmenger syndrome (ES) as well as survival. Methods Out of 1549 patients with DS with congenital heart disease in the National Register for Congenital Heart Defects, 894 patients (55% female, mean age 17.5years) had a post-tricuspid shunt lesion (atrioventricular septal defect 69.5%, ventricular septal defect 27.7%, patent arterial duct 2.6%) and were included in the current study. Results The likelihood of being treated interventionally or surgically before the age of 1year increased significantly over time. In parallel, the likelihood of developing ES decreased over time (53% birth cohort during 1950s/1960s vs 0.5% birth cohort during 2000-2009, p<0.0001). Overall survival after 1, 10, 20 and 40years was 96.8%, 94.1%, 92.6% and 75.5%, respectively. Patients with ES had a significantly worse survival compared with those without ES (HR 18.1; 95% CI 7.2 to 45.4; p<0.0001). Conclusions The availability of surgical correction was associated with a decrease in the likelihood of developing ES. Patients with DS still have reduced survival prospects compared with the general population, but this effect is largely driven by patients developing ES who still have a very poor prognosis.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available