Patients with Isolated Focal Right Ventricular Dyskinetic Segments: Toward a Better Understanding of This Cohort
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
BACKGROUND: The 2010 revised Task Force criteria for the diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) provided guidance for the classification of patients as definitive, borderline or possible ARVC. However, many patients with clinical suspicion for ARVC have isolated RV dyskinetic segments only and partly meet cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging criteria. This subgroup of patients and the implication of this imaging finding remain not well defined. METHODS: There were 65 consecutive patients with clinical suspicion for ARVC who were referred for CMR between 2015 and 2017. The presence of fatty infiltration and fibrosis were assessed using T2 imaging and myocardial delayed enhancement sequences, respectively. RV wall motions, volumes and ejection fraction (EF) of all patients were re-analysed and quantified. Available data on family history, Holter findings, and electrocardiograms were also reviewed. RESULTS: There were 5 patients (7.7%) that fulfilled major CMR criteria for ARVC: 4 were classified as having definitive ARVC; and 1/5 as borderline. There were 33 patients with no RV dyskinetic segments: none were classified as having definitive or borderline ARVC; 4/33 were classified as possible ARVC, leaving 29/33 as normal or no ARVC. Finally, there were 27 remaining patients (41.5%) with isolated RV dyskinetic segments: 1/27 was classified as definitive ARVC; 4/27 as borderline; 8/27 as possible; leaving 15/27 as indeterminate. Compared to control, those with isolated RV dyskinesia (including the subgroup labelled as indeterminate 15/27) had more abnormal RVEF, larger RV end-diastolic volume index (82 ± 12 mL/m2 vs. 72 ± 12 mL/m2, p-value 0.0127), and a trend for higher odds of dilated RV (odds ratio 3.0 [0.81–11], p-value 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with a clinical suspicion for ARVC, almost 40% had isolated focal RV dyskinetic segments with the majority remaining unclassified. This cohort had more RV dilation and abnormal EF compared to control.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The 2010 revised Task Force criteria for the diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) provided guidance for the classification of patients as definitive, borderline or possible ARVC. However, many patients with clinical suspicion for ARVC have isolated RV dyskinetic segments only and partly meet cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging criteria. This subgroup of patients and the implication of this imaging finding remain not well defined. METHODS: There were 65 consecutive patients with clinical suspicion for ARVC who were referred for CMR between 2015 and 2017. The presence of fatty infiltration and fibrosis were assessed using T2 imaging and myocardial delayed enhancement sequences, respectively. RV wall motions, volumes and ejection fraction (EF) of all patients were re-analysed and quantified. Available data on family history, Holter findings, and electrocardiograms were also reviewed. RESULTS: There were 5 patients (7.7%) that fulfilled major CMR criteria for ARVC: 4 were classified as having definitive ARVC; and 1/5 as borderline. There were 33 patients with no RV dyskinetic segments: none were classified as having definitive or borderline ARVC; 4/33 were classified as possible ARVC, leaving 29/33 as normal or no ARVC. Finally, there were 27 remaining patients (41.5%) with isolated RV dyskinetic segments: 1/27 was classified as definitive ARVC; 4/27 as borderline; 8/27 as possible; leaving 15/27 as indeterminate. Compared to control, those with isolated RV dyskinesia (including the subgroup labelled as indeterminate 15/27) had more abnormal RVEF, larger RV end-diastolic volume index (82 ± 12 mL/m2 vs. 72 ± 12 mL/m2, p-value 0.0127), and a trend for higher odds of dilated RV (odds ratio 3.0 [0.81–11], p-value 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with a clinical suspicion for ARVC, almost 40% had isolated focal RV dyskinetic segments with the majority remaining unclassified. This cohort had more RV dilation and abnormal EF compared to control.
참고문헌 (22)
- Haugaa KH, "Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy, clinical manifestations, and diagnosis", Europace, 18, pp.965~972 (2016)
- te Riele AS, "Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy(ARVC) : cardiovascular magnetic resonance update", J Cardiovasc Magn Reson, 16, pp.50~ (2014)
- Borgquist R, "The diagnostic performance of imaging methods in ARVC using the 2010 Task Force criteria", Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging, 15, pp.1219~1225 (2014)
- Marcus FI, "Diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy", dysplasia : proposed modification of the Task Force Criteria, 2010, pp.31, 806~814
- Perazzolo Marra M, "Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Contribution of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging to the diagnosis", Herz, 40, pp.600~606 (2015)
- Femia G, "Impact of new task force criteria in the diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy", Int J Cardiol, 171, pp.179~183 (2014)
- Rachoin R, "Arrhythmogenic ventricular cardiomyopathy and sudden cardiac death : Left or right?", J Nucl Cardiol, 24, pp.527~533 (2017)
- Elmaghawry M, "A global perspective of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy", Glob Cardiol Sci Pract, 2012, pp.81~92 (2013)
- Basso C, "Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy", Lancet, 373, pp.1289~1300 (2009)
- Sen-Chowdhry S, "Arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy : etiology, diagnosis, and treatment", Annu Rev Med, 61, pp.233~253 (2010)
- Rastegar N, "Cardiac MR findings and potential diagnostic pitfalls in patients evaluated for arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy", Radiographics, 34, pp.1553~1570 (2014)
- Bluemke DA, "MR imaging of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy : morphologic findings and interobserver reliability", Cardiology, 99, pp.153~162 (2003)
- Bomma C, "Misdiagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia", cardiomyopathy, 2004, pp.15, 300~306
- Quick S, "Evaluation and classification of right ventricular wall motion abnormalities in healthy subjects by 3-tesla cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging", Neth Heart J, 23, pp.64~69 (2015)
- Sievers B, "Right ventricular wall motion abnormalities found in healthy subjects by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging and characterized with a new segmental model", J Cardiovasc Magn Reson, 6, pp.601~608 (2004)
- Liu T, "Effect of the 2010 task force criteria on reclassification of cardiovascular magnetic resonance criteria for arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy", J Cardiovasc Magn Reson, 16, pp.47~ (2014)
- Vermes E, "Impact of the revision of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy", dysplasia task force criteria on its prevalence by CMR criteria, 2011, pp.4, 282~287
- Cox MG, "Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia", cardiomyopathy diagnostic task force criteria : impact of new task force criteria, 2010, pp.3, 126~133
- Femia G, "Systematic review : Impact of the new task force criteria in the diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy", Int J Cardiol, 241, pp.311~317 (2017)
- Hamid MS, "Prospective evaluation of relatives for familial arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy", dysplasia reveals a need to broaden diagnostic criteria, 2002, pp.40, 1445~1450
- Smiseth OA, "Myocardial strain imaging : how useful is it in clinical decision making?", Eur Heart J, 37, pp.1196~1207 (2016)
- Prati G, "Right ventricular strain and dyssynchrony assessment in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy : cardiac magnetic resonance feature-tracking study", Circ Cardiovasc Imaging, 8, pp.e003647~ (2015)[DOI]