Natural History and Risk Stratification in Andersen-Tawil Syndrome Type 1.

BACKGROUND: Andersen-Tawil Syndrome type 1 (ATS1) is a rare arrhythmogenic disorder, caused by loss-of-function mutations in the KCNJ2 gene. We present here the largest cohort of patients with ATS1 with outcome data reported. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to define the risk of life-threatening arrhythmic events (LAE), identify predictors of such events, and define the efficacy of antiarrhythmic therapy in patients with ATS1. METHODS: Clinical and genetic data from consecutive patients with ATS1 from 23 centers were entered in a database implemented at ICS Maugeri in Pavia, Italy, and pooled for analysis. RESULTS: We enrolled 118 patients with ATS1 from 57 families (age 23 ± 17 years at enrollment). Over a median follow-up of 6.2 years (interquartile range: 2.7 to 16.5 years), 17 patients experienced a first LAE, with a cumulative probability of 7.9% at 5 years. An increased risk of LAE was associated with a history of syncope (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.54; p = 0.02), with the documentation of sustained ventricular tachycardia (HR 9.34; p = 0.001) and with the administration of amiodarone (HR: 268; p < 0.001). The rate of LAE without therapy (1.24 per 100 person-years [py]) was not reduced by beta-blockers alone (1.37 per 100 py; p = 1.00), or in combination with Class Ic antiarrhythmic drugs (1.46 per 100 py, p = 1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate that the clinical course of patients with ATS1 is characterized by a high rate of LAE. A history of unexplained syncope or of documented sustained ventricular tachycardia is associated with a higher risk of LAE. Amiodarone is proarrhythmic and should be avoided in patients with ATS1.

Bicuspid aortic valve behaviour in elite athletes.

AIMS: To determine the prevalence and characteristics of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) among elite athletes and to analyse the effect of long-term exercise training on their aortas. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive BAV and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) elite athletes from a population of 5136 athletes evaluated at the Sports Medicine Center of the Spanish National Sports Council were identified using echocardiography. A total of 41 BAV elite athletes were matched with 41 TAV elite athletes, and 41 BAV non-athletic patients from three Spanish tertiary hospitals. Sixteen BAV elite athletes who had undergone at least two cardiac evaluations separated by more than 3 years were selected to assess their clinical course. The prevalence of BAV in elite athletes was 0.8%. The proximal ascending aorta was larger for both BAV groups in comparison to TAV athletes (P = 0.001). No differences in aortic diameters were found between BAV athletes and BAV non-athletes. In BAV elite athletes, the annual growth rates for aortic annulus, sinuses of Valsalva, sinotubular junction, and proximal ascending aorta were 0.04 ± 0.24, 0.11 ± 0.59, 0.14 ± 0.38, and 0.21 ± 0.44 mm/year, respectively. Aortic regurgitation was the only functional abnormality, but no significant progression was found. CONCLUSION: High-intensity training and sports competition may not aggravate BAV condition during elite athletes' careers. BAV elite athletes with mild-to-moderately dilated aortas may engage in high dynamic cardiovascular exercise without adverse consequences, although an echocardiographic follow-up is recommended.

Prognosis of Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis After the Decision to Perform an Intervention.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Current therapeutic options for severe aortic stenosis (AS) include transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Our aim was to describe the prognosis of patients with severe AS after the decision to perform an intervention, to study the variables influencing their prognosis, and to describe the determinants of waiting time > 2 months. METHODS: Subanalysis of the IDEAS (Influence of the Severe Aortic Stenosis Diagnosis) registry in patients indicated for TAVI or SAVR. RESULTS: Of 726 patients with severe AS diagnosed in January 2014, the decision to perform an intervention was made in 300, who were included in the present study. The mean age was 74.0 ± 9.7 years. A total of 258 (86.0%) underwent an intervention: 59 TAVI and 199 SAVR. At the end of the year, 42 patients (14.0%) with an indication for an intervention did not receive it, either because they remained on the waiting list (34 patients) or died while waiting for the procedure (8 patients). Of the patients who died while on the waiting list, half did so in the first 100 days. The mean waiting time was 2.9 ± 1.6 for TAVI and 3.5 ± 0.2 months for SAVR (P = .03). The independent predictors of mortality were male sex (HR, 2.6; 95%CI, 1.1-6.0), moderate-severe mitral regurgitation (HR, 2.6; 95%CI, 1.5-4.5), reduced mobility (HR, 4.6; 95%CI, 1.7-12.6), and nonintervention (HR, 2.3; 95%CI, 1.02-5.03). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe aortic stenosis awaiting therapeutic procedures have a high mortality risk. Some clinical indicators predict a worse prognosis and suggest the need for early intervention.

Large-scale assessment of aortic stenosis: facing the next cardiac epidemic?

Aims: Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most frequent valvular disease in developed countries. As society grows older, the prevalence of AS increases. However, the real burden, current aetiology, severity distribution, and echocardiographic patterns of AS are not fully clear. The aim of the present study is to provide an accurate overall picture of AS, focusing on its epidemiology, aetiology, and echocardiographic features. Methods and results: A total of 29 502 consecutive echocardiograpies were prospectively included in this multicentre study. The present sample was composed of patients with advanced age (mean 75.2 years) and similar gender distribution. High proportion (7.2%) showed any grade of AS, with important number of patients (2.8%) presenting severe AS, most of them aged 75 years or more. Coexisting valvular disease appeared in almost half of the sample (49.6%), being the most frequently diagnosed aortic regurgitation (AR) (22%) followed by mitral regurgitation (MR) (15.6%). Degenerative aetiology was found in the vast majority (93.4%) of the studies whereas rheumatic is currently infrequent (3.35%). Low flow-low gradient (LFLG) appeared in 24.6% of patients with severe AS. Atrial fibrillation (23.1% vs. 11.6%; P = 0.002), MR (23.3% vs. 15.1%; P = 0.018), and right ventricle dysfunction (13.3% vs. 5.2%; P = 0.003) appeared frequently in LFLG group. Conclusions: Burden of AS is higher than previously assumed. Degenerative aetiology is the main cause of AS. Most of the patients are elder with high prevalence of significant co-existing valvular disease. LFLG severe AS is present in an important proportion of patients, showing high grade of left ventricle remodelling.

Comparison of 1-Year Outcome in Patients With Severe Aorta Stenosis Treated Conservatively or by Aortic Valve Replacement or by Percutaneous Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (Data from a Multicenter Spanish Registry).

The factors that influence decision making in severe aortic stenosis (AS) are unknown. Our aim was to assess, in patients with severe AS, the determinants of management and prognosis in a multicenter registry that enrolled all consecutive adults with severe AS during a 1-month period. One-year follow-up was obtained in all patients and included vital status and aortic valve intervention (aortic valve replacement [AVR] and transcatheter aortic valve implantation [TAVI]). A total of 726 patients were included, mean age was 77.3 ± 10.6 years, and 377 were women (51.8%). The most common management was conservative therapy in 468 (64.5%) followed by AVR in 199 (27.4%) and TAVI in 59 (8.1%). The strongest association with aortic valve intervention was patient management in a tertiary hospital with cardiac surgery (odds ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.8 to 4.1, p <0.001). The 2 main reasons to choose conservative management were the absence of significant symptoms (136% to 29.1%) and the presence of co-morbidity (128% to 27.4%). During 1-year follow-up, 132 patients died (18.2%). The main causes of death were heart failure (60% to 45.5%) and noncardiac diseases (46% to 34.9%). One-year survival for patients treated conservatively, with TAVI, and with AVR was 76.3%, 94.9%, and 92.5%, respectively, p <0.001. One-year survival of patients treated conservatively in the absence of significant symptoms was 97.1%. In conclusion, most patients with severe AS are treated conservatively. The outcome in asymptomatic patients managed conservatively was acceptable. Management in tertiary hospitals is associated with valve intervention. One-year survival was similar with both interventional strategies.