RESUMEN
Acute heart failure is a heterogeneous clinical syndrome and is the first cause of unplanned hospitalization in people >65 years. Patients with heart failure may have different clinical presentations according to clinical history, pre-existing heart disease, and pattern of intravascular congestion. A comprehensive assessment of clinical, echocardiographic, and laboratory data should aid in clinical decision-making and treatment. In some cases, a more accurate evaluation of patient haemodynamics via a pulmonary artery catheter may be necessary to undertake and guide escalation and de-escalation of therapy, especially when clinical, echo, and laboratory data are inconclusive or in the presence of right ventricular dysfunction. Similarly, a pulmonary artery catheter may be useful in patients with cardiogenic shock undergoing mechanical circulatory support. With the subsequent de-escalation of therapy and haemodynamic stabilization, the implementation of guideline-directed medical therapy should be pursued to reduce the risk of subsequent heart failure hospitalization and death, paying particular attention to the recognition and treatment of residual congestion.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: A systematic evaluation of patients with unexplained cardiac arrest (UCA) yields a diagnosis in 50% of the cases. However, evolution of clinical phenotype, identification of new disease-causing mutations, and description of new syndromes may revise the diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: To assess the evolution in diagnosis among patients with initially UCA. METHODS: Diagnoses were reviewed for all patients with UCA recruited from the Cardiac Arrest Survivors with Preserved Ejection Fraction Registry with at least 1 year of follow-up. RESULTS: After comprehensive investigation of 68 patients (age 45.2 ± 14.9 years; 63% men), the initial diagnosis was as follows: idiopathic ventricular fibrillation (n = 34 [50%]), a primary arrhythmic disorder (n = 21 [31%]), and an occult structural cause (n = 13 [19%]). Patients were followed for 30 ± 17 months, during which time the diagnosis changed in 12 (18%) patients. A specific diagnosis emerged for 7 patients (21%) with an initial diagnosis of idiopathic ventricular fibrillation. A structural cardiomyopathy evolved in 2 patients with an initial diagnosis of primary electrical disorder, while the specific structural cardiomyopathy was revised for 1 patient. Two patients with an initial diagnosis of a primary arrhythmic disorder were subsequently considered to have a different primary arrhythmic disorder. A follow-up resting electrocardiogram was the test that most frequently changed the diagnosis (67% of the cases), followed by genetic testing (17%). CONCLUSIONS: The reevaluation of patients presenting with UCA may lead to a change in diagnosis in up to 20%. This emphasizes the need to actively monitor the phenotype and also has implications for the treatment of these patients and the screening of their relatives.