Pezawas Thomas, Stix Guenter, Kastner Johannes, Schneider Barbara, Wolzt Michael, Schmidinger Herwig
Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.
Int J Cardiol. 2006 Mar 8;107(3):360-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2005.03.049.
Not all patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy (ARVD/C) are at risk for sudden cardiac death. The aim of the study was to evaluate the risk stratification in patients with ARVD/C.
Programmed ventricular stimulation (PVS) was performed in 34 ARVD/C patients. Twenty-two, 7 and 4 patients had documented sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (smVT), non-smVT and ventricular fibrillation, respectively. One patient experienced syncope only. An implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) was implanted in 11 patients inducible in smVT with hemodynamic compromise, in 4 patients with documented ventricular fibrillation and in one patient with non-smVT (194 ms tachycardia cycle length) (ICD group, n = 16). Ten patients were left without any antiarrhythmic therapy, 5 patients received antiarrhythmic drugs and 3 patients underwent successful VT ablation (non-ICD group, n = 18). Thirteen patients had an abnormal signal averaged ECG. During 6.5 +/- 2.4 years 69% of ICD patients received appropriate discharges and one non-ICD patient had a hemodynamically tolerated smVT recurrence (no sudden cardiac death in both groups). Comparison between the cycle lengths of clinical VT, induced VT and follow-up VT revealed a strong relationship (R = 0.62-0.88). On multivariate analysis abnormal signal averaged ECG and decreased left ventricular ejection fraction were statistically significant predictors for VT recurrence.
In ARVD/C the tachycardia cycle length of clinical VT, PVS-induced VT and follow-up VT correlate well implicating that a PVS-guided approach does not provide additional information. Spontaneous arrhythmia in combination with clinical presentation allows identification of patients in need for an ICD.
并非所有致心律失常性右室发育不良/心肌病(ARVD/C)患者都有心脏性猝死风险。本研究旨在评估ARVD/C患者的风险分层。
对34例ARVD/C患者进行程序心室刺激(PVS)。分别有22例、7例和4例患者记录到持续性单形性室性心动过速(smVT)、非smVT和室颤。仅1例患者发生晕厥。11例smVT可诱发且伴有血流动力学障碍的患者、4例记录到室颤的患者以及1例非smVT(心动过速周期长度194 ms)的患者植入了植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)(ICD组,n = 16)。10例患者未接受任何抗心律失常治疗,5例患者接受抗心律失常药物治疗,3例患者成功进行了室性心动过速消融(非ICD组,n = 18)。13例患者信号平均心电图异常。在6.5±2.4年期间,69%的ICD患者接受了恰当电击治疗,1例非ICD患者发生了血流动力学可耐受的smVT复发(两组均无心脏性猝死)。临床室性心动过速、诱发室性心动过速和随访室性心动过速的周期长度比较显示出很强的相关性(R = 0.62 - 0.88)。多因素分析显示,异常信号平均心电图和左心室射血分数降低是室性心动过速复发的统计学显著预测因素。
在ARVD/C中,临床室性心动过速、PVS诱发室性心动过速和随访室性心动过速的心动过速周期长度相关性良好,这意味着PVS指导方法并不能提供额外信息。自发心律失常结合临床表现可识别需要植入ICD的患者。