Department of Cardiology, Yokohama City University Medical Center.
Department of Cardiology, Yokohama City University Hospital.
Int Heart J. 2021 Mar 30;62(2):224-229. doi: 10.1536/ihj.20-360. Epub 2021 Mar 17.
This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics and prognosis of patients with vasospastic angina (VSA) diagnosed by a provocation test with a secondary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), compared with patients with organic coronary stenosis. We retrospectively evaluated 309 consecutive patients who received an ICD implantation between January 2010 and March 2018 in our institutions. Of these patients, 206 were implanted with an ICD for secondary prevention. In these 206 patients, 40 with VSA and 72 with organic coronary stenosis were evaluated. Patients with VSA were characterized by younger age (56.1 ± 13.1 versus 69.2 ± 9.5 years, respectively), and a lower prevalence of diabetes (15.0% versus 40.3%, respectively) and heart failure (2.5% versus 26.4%, respectively) than patients with organic coronary stenosis (P < 0.001). Using the Kaplan-Meier analysis, with the VSA group as the reference, the incidence of appropriate ICD shock was similar between the two groups (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.341-2.109; P = 0.722). The incidence of ventricular fibrillation was significantly higher in the VSA group (hazard ratio, 0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.057-0.814; P = 0.024), whereas the incidence of major adverse cardiac events, including cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina pectoris, and heart failure, was significantly higher in the organic coronary stenosis group (hazard ratio, 13.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.756-98.17; P = 0.012). In conclusion, patients with VSA with an ICD implanted for secondary prevention have a higher risk of ventricular fibrillation and lower risk of major adverse cardiac events than patients with organic coronary stenosis.
这项研究旨在评估通过二级预防植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)激发试验诊断为血管痉挛性心绞痛(VSA)患者的特征和预后,并与有机冠状动脉狭窄患者进行比较。我们回顾性评估了 2010 年 1 月至 2018 年 3 月期间在我们机构接受 ICD 植入的 309 例连续患者。其中,206 例患者因二级预防植入 ICD。在这 206 例患者中,40 例为 VSA,72 例为有机冠状动脉狭窄。VSA 患者的特征为年龄较小(分别为 56.1 ± 13.1 岁和 69.2 ± 9.5 岁),糖尿病(分别为 15.0%和 40.3%)和心力衰竭(分别为 2.5%和 26.4%)的患病率较低(均 P < 0.001)。通过 Kaplan-Meier 分析,以 VSA 组为参照,两组 ICD 适当电击的发生率相似(风险比,0.85;95%置信区间,0.341-2.109;P = 0.722)。VSA 组室颤的发生率明显较高(风险比,0.22;95%置信区间,0.057-0.814;P = 0.024),而有机冠状动脉狭窄组主要不良心脏事件(包括心源性死亡、非致死性心肌梗死、不稳定型心绞痛住院和心力衰竭)的发生率明显较高(风险比,13.1;95%置信区间,1.756-98.17;P = 0.012)。总之,植入 ICD 进行二级预防的 VSA 患者发生室颤的风险较高,而发生主要不良心脏事件的风险较低,与有机冠状动脉狭窄患者相比。