Sharma Apurva, Assis Fabrizio, James Cynthia A, Murray Brittney, Tichnell Crystal, Tandri Harikrishna, Calkins Hugh
Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019 Oct;30(10):2020-2026. doi: 10.1111/jce.14088. Epub 2019 Aug 1.
Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is an inherited progressive cardiomyopathy characterized by frequent life-threatening arrhythmias. The diagnosis of ARVC is challenging and is on the basis of a set of major and minor criteria as described by the modified Task Force Criteria (TFC). We report our clinical experience in a series of patients who were misdiagnosed with ARVC and subsequently underwent removal of their implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) after a re-evaluation at our center.
We studied 12 patients who were misdiagnosed with ARVC and had ICD implantation before our assessment. All patients had a repeat evaluation and were scored according to TFC before ICD removal. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) studies performed at outside institutions during the initial evaluation were reported abnormal and classified as meeting major TFC in ninety percent of patients. The most common abnormality reported was fatty infiltration of the right ventricular (RV) free wall and/or presence of focal intra-myocardial fat in six patients (50%). On re-evaluation, none of these findings fulfilled the TFC for the diagnosis.
This study demonstrated that high dependence on misinterpretation of CMR along with a misunderstanding of the TFC evaluation are the main reasons for the misdiagnosis of ARVC. Despite the updated criteria for almost a decade, this study reminds that the diagnosis of ARVC is complex and hence careful TFC evaluation and consideration of multiple cardiac test results should be the focused approach for clinicians when confronted with suspected ARVC patients.
致心律失常性右室心肌病(ARVC)是一种遗传性进行性心肌病,其特征为频繁发生危及生命的心律失常。ARVC的诊断具有挑战性,是基于改良的工作组标准(TFC)所描述的一系列主要和次要标准。我们报告了一系列被误诊为ARVC的患者的临床经验,这些患者在我们中心重新评估后,随后接受了植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)的移除。
我们研究了12例在我们评估前被误诊为ARVC并植入ICD的患者。所有患者均进行了重复评估,并在移除ICD前根据TFC进行评分。在初始评估期间,外部机构进行的心脏磁共振成像(CMR)研究报告异常,并且在90%的患者中被分类为符合主要TFC标准。报告的最常见异常是右心室(RV)游离壁脂肪浸润和/或局灶性心肌内脂肪,6例患者(50%)出现这种情况。重新评估时,这些发现均不符合ARVC诊断的TFC标准。
本研究表明,对CMR误判的高度依赖以及对TFC评估的误解是ARVC误诊的主要原因。尽管更新标准已近十年,但本研究提醒,ARVC的诊断很复杂,因此,当面对疑似ARVC患者时,临床医生应重点仔细进行TFC评估并考虑多项心脏检查结果。