Unité de Rythmologie, Institut de Cardiologie, GHU Pitié-Salpêtrière Paris, France.
Front Physiol. 2012 Dec 27;3:474. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2012.00474. eCollection 2012.
Brugada syndrome (BrS) is considered a primary electrical disease. However, morphological abnormalities have been reported and localized arrhythmogenic right ventricular (RV) dysplasia/cardiomyopathy (ARVD/C) may mimic its phenotype, raising the question of an overlap between these two conditions and making difficult the therapeutic management of patients with borderline forms. The main objective of this study was to assess prospectively the prevalence of BrS and ARVD/C on the basis of international criteria, in patients with BrS-ECG and normal echocardiography, looking for a potential overlap between the two pathologies. The secondary objectives were to describe and quantify angiographic structural alterations, hemodynamics, electrophysiology, and genetics in the setting of BrS-ECG.
Hundred and fourteen consecutive patients matched in age underwent prospectively cardiac catheterization and quantitative biventricular contrast angiography to rule out a structural heart disease. Fifty-one patients with a BrS-ECG (BrS group, 7 F, 44 M, 43 ± 11 y) had a spontaneous or ajmaline-induced BrS coved type ECG. For angiographic comparison, 49 patients with localized ARVD/C but without ST segment elevation in the right precordial leads (14 F, 35 M, 39 ± 13 y) were also studied. They fulfilled international ESC/WHF 2000 criteria and presented angiographic localized forms, mainly confined to hypokinetic anteroapical zone (characterized by trabecular dysarray and hypertrophy), and/or diaphragmatic wall, thus resulting in RV normal volumes and preserved systolic function. These two populations were also compared with 14 control patients (7 F, 7 M, 38 ± 16 y). Among BrS group, we identified three main angiographic phenotypes: BrS group I = patients with normal RV (n = 15, 29%); BrS group II = patients with segmental RV wall motion abnormalities but no structural arguments for ARVD/C (n = 26, 51%); BrS group III = patients with localized abnormalities suggestive of focal ARVD/C (n = 10, 20%).
Among BrS group, 34/51 patients (67%) fulfilled BrS HRS/EHRA 2005 criteria. Nineteen (37%) were symptomatic for aborted sudden death, agonal nocturnal respiration or syncope. Ventricular stimulation was positive in 14 patients (28%). Angiography showed RV abnormalities in 36/51 patients (71%) of BrS group (BrS groups II and III). Late potentials were present in 73% (100% sensitivity and NPV for an angiographic ARVD/C, but poor specificity and PPV, both 37%). In BrS group III, 8/10 patients (16% of BrS patients) finally fulfilled international ESC/WHF 2000 ARVD/C criteria and 5/10 (10% of BrS patients) fulfilled BrS diagnostic criteria. An overlap was observed in 4 patients (8% of BrS patients) who fulfilled both ARVD/C and BrS criteria. Among the 45 genotyped patients, only one presented a SCN5A mutation, whereas a TRPM4 mutation was found in another patient. Both belonged to BrS group II. MOG1 gene analysis was negative for all patients, as were PKP2, DSP, DSG2, and DSC2 analyzes performed in BrS group III.
Seventy-one percent of patients with a BrS-ECG had abnormal RV wall motion and 16 had structural alterations corresponding to localized (anteroapical and/or diaphragmatic) ARVD/C. Moreover, 8% of BrS-ECG patients fulfilled both BrS and ARVD/C criteria. Our results support the hypothesis of an overlap between BrS and localized forms of ARVD/C. Conversely, genetic screening was poorly contributive for both diseases in the present series.
Brugada 综合征(BrS)被认为是一种原发性电疾病。然而,已经报道了形态学异常,局部心律失常性右心室(RV)发育不良/心肌病(ARVD/C)可能模仿其表型,这引发了这两种情况之间是否存在重叠的问题,使得治疗具有边缘形式的患者变得困难。本研究的主要目的是根据国际标准,前瞻性评估 BrS-ECG 且超声心动图正常的患者中 BrS 和 ARVD/C 的患病率,寻找这两种病理之间的潜在重叠。次要目标是描述和量化 BrS-ECG 中的血管造影结构改变、血液动力学、电生理学和遗传学。
114 例年龄匹配的连续患者前瞻性接受了心脏导管检查和定量双心室对比血管造影术,以排除结构性心脏病。51 例 BrS-ECG(BrS 组,7 例女性,44 例男性,43±11 岁)患者具有自发性或阿马林诱导的 BrS 覆盖型 ECG。为了进行血管造影比较,还研究了 49 例局部 ARVD/C 但右胸导联无 ST 段抬高的患者(14 例女性,35 例男性,39±13 岁)。他们符合国际 ESC/WHF 2000 标准,表现为局部形式,主要局限于运动减退的前外侧区(特征为小梁排列紊乱和肥大)和/或膈壁,从而导致 RV 正常容积和保留收缩功能。这两个群体也与 14 名对照患者(7 例女性,7 例男性,38±16 岁)进行了比较。在 BrS 组中,我们确定了三种主要的血管造影表型:BrS 组 I = 正常 RV 的患者(n=15,29%);BrS 组 II = 存在节段性 RV 壁运动异常但无 ARVD/C 结构证据的患者(n=26,51%);BrS 组 III = 存在提示局灶性 ARVD/C 的局部异常的患者(n=10,20%)。
在 BrS 组中,34/51 例(67%)患者符合 BrS HRS/EHRA 2005 标准。19 例(37%)有猝死、濒死夜间呼吸或晕厥的症状。14 例(28%)患者进行了心室刺激。36/51 例(71%)BrS 组患者的血管造影显示 RV 异常(BrS 组 II 和 III)。73%的患者存在晚期电位(ARVD/C 血管造影的 100%敏感性和阴性预测值,但特异性和阳性预测值均为 37%)。在 BrS 组 III 中,10 例患者中的 8 例(BrS 患者的 16%)最终符合国际 ESC/WHF 2000 ARVD/C 标准,10 例患者中的 5 例(BrS 患者的 10%)符合 BrS 诊断标准。在 4 例患者(BrS 患者的 8%)中观察到重叠,他们同时符合 ARVD/C 和 BrS 标准。在 45 例基因分型患者中,只有 1 例存在 SCN5A 突变,而另 1 例存在 TRPM4 突变。两者均属于 BrS 组 II。MOG1 基因分析在所有患者中均为阴性,PKP2、DSP、DSG2 和 DSC2 分析在 BrS 组 III 中也均为阴性。
BrS-ECG 患者中有 71%的患者存在 RV 壁运动异常,16%的患者存在与局部(前外侧和/或膈)ARVD/C 对应的结构改变。此外,8%的 BrS-ECG 患者同时符合 BrS 和 ARVD/C 标准。我们的结果支持 BrS 和局部 ARVD/C 之间存在重叠的假设。相反,在本系列中,遗传筛查对这两种疾病的贡献都很小。