4.7 Article

Paced ventricular electrogram fractionation predicts sudden cardiac death in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

期刊

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL
卷 29, 期 13, 页码 1653-1661

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn111

关键词

heart arrest; etectrophysiotogy; cardiomyopathy; defibrillation

资金

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

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据