The many faces of early repolarization syndrome: A single-center case series.

BACKGROUND: Early repolarization syndrome (ERS) is a rare but increasingly recognized cause of malignant ventricular arrhythmias. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize the presentations and treatments of ERS at our institution. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients presenting to our institution between 2008 and 2019 with ERS. Exclusion criteria included Brugada syndrome, positive provocative testing with class I antiarrhythmic drugs, metabolic disturbances, or structural heart disease. RESULTS: Of 10 patients identified with ERS, 8 were men with a mean age of 30 ± 17 years at diagnosis. Documented arrhythmias included ventricular fibrillation in 7 of 10, polymorphic ventricular tachycardia in 3 of 10, and monomorphic ventricular tachycardia in 3 of 10 patients. Atrial fibrillation was diagnosed in 3 of 10, and atrioventricular block was seen in 2 of 10. J waves and/or electrocardiographic early repolarization patterns were dynamic in 7 of 10. Arrhythmias occurred at rest in 8 of 10 and with exertion in 2 of 10. Only 1 patient had a family history of sudden death, and 4 of 10 patients had variants of uncertain significance on genetic testing. Quinidine effectively suppressed arrhythmias in 5 of 5 patients but required dose escalation to >1 g/d in 3 of 5 patients. Abnormal epicardial electrograms were recorded over the inferolateral left ventricle in 2 patients who underwent mapping and were successfully ablated. Premature ventricular contraction triggers were also targeted for ablation in 3 patients. CONCLUSION: ERS is a heterogeneous condition and may be associated with both atrial and ventricular arrhythmias, atrioventricular block, dynamic electrocardiographic changes, and variable triggers. In addition to targeting premature ventricular contraction triggers, mapping and ablation of abnormal epicardial electrograms may be a potential future treatment strategy.

Patient and provider perspectives on the development of personalized medicine: a mixed-methods approach.

While genetic testing gains adoption in specialty services such as oncology, neurology, and cardiology, use of genetic and genomic testing has yet to be adopted as widely in primary care. The purpose of this study is to identify and compare patient and primary care provider (PCP) expectations of genetics services in primary care. Patient and PCP perspectives were assessed through a mixed-method approach combining an online survey and semi-structured interviews in a primary care department of a large academic medical institution. A convenience sample of 100 adult primary care patients and 26 PCPs was gathered. The survey and interview questions focused on perceptions of genetic testing, experience with genetic testing, and expectations of genetic services in primary care. Patients felt that their PCP was knowledgeable about genetic testing and expected their PCP to be the first to recognize a need for genetic testing based on family history. Nonetheless, patients reported that PCPs rarely used family history information to discuss genetic risks or order testing. In contrast, PCPs felt uncertain about the clinical utility and scientific value of genetic testing. PCPs were concerned that genetic testing could cause anxiety, frustration, discrimination, and reduced insurability, and that there was unequal access to testing. PCPs described themselves as being "gatekeepers" to genetic testing but did not feel confident or have the desire to become experts in genetic testing. However, PCPs were open to increasing their working knowledge of genetic testing. Within this academic medical center, there is a gap between what patients expect and what primary care providers feel they are adequately prepared to provide in terms of genetic testing services.

Promoting appropriate genetic testing: the impact of a combined test review and consultative service.

PURPOSE: Genetic test misorders can adversely affect patient care. However, little is known about the types of misorders and the overall impact of a utilization management (UM) program on curbing misorders. This study aimed to identify different types of misorders and analyze the impact of a combined test review and consultative service on reducing misorders over time. METHODS: Selected genetic tests were systematically reviewed between January and December 2015 at Stanford Health Care. Misorders were categorized into five types: clerical errors, redundant testing, better alternatives, controversial, and uncategorized. Moreover, consultations were offered to help clinicians with test selection. RESULTS: Of the 629 molecular test orders reviewed, 13% were classified as misorders, and 7% were modified or canceled. Controversial misorders constitute the most common type (42%); however, unlike the other misorder types, they were negligibly affected by test review. Simultaneously, 71 consults were received. With the introduction of the UM program, genetic test misorders went from 22% at baseline to 3% at the end of the year. CONCLUSION: Our results show that the combined approach of test review and consultative service effectively reduced misorders over time and suggest that a UM program focused on eliminating misorders can positively influence health-care providers' behaviors.Genet Med advance online publication 26 January 2017.