4.7 Article

Paced ventricular electrogram fractionation predicts sudden cardiac death in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Journal

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL
Volume 29, Issue 13, Pages 1653-1661

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn111

Keywords

heart arrest; etectrophysiotogy; cardiomyopathy; defibrillation

Funding

  1. British Heart Foundation [RG 95009, PG/2001081/12988]
  2. MRC [G0100186] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Medical Research Council [G0100186] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims Paced electrogram fractionation analysis (PEFA) has been assessed for the prediction of sudden cardiac death (SCID) in a large-scale, prospective study of patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Methods and results We determined the positive predictive value (PPV) of PEFA in relation to other risk factors for SCID and outcomes in and results 179 patients with HCM and no prior history of cardiac arrest. Patients were followed over a mean 4.3 years (range: 1.1-6.3 years). Thirteen patients had SCID-equivalent events: four of these patients died suddenly, three were resuscitated from ventricular fibrillation (VF), and six had implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) discharges in response to VF PEFA identified nine of these patients and another 14 non-VF patients yielding a censored PPV of between 0.19 and 0.59 that was greater than the PPV that was the formal stopping point of the trial (0.18). Eighty per cent of patients were followed for 4 years or more. The PPV for the identification of SCID in this group was 0.38 (0-17-0.59). The use of two or more conventional markers to predict SCD identified five patients with SCID-equivalent events in the 4-year follow-up group and 42 other patients without events yielding a PPV of 0.106 (confidence limits 0.02-0.15). Conclusion PEFA identifies HCM patients at risk of SCD with greater accuracy than non-invasive techniques and may have an important role in determining indications for ICD prescription.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available