Incidence, risk assessment and prevention of sudden cardiac death in cardiomyopathies.

Cardiomyopathies are a significant contributor to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, mainly due to the development of heart failure and increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Despite improvement in survival with contemporary treatment, SCD remains an important cause of mortality in cardiomyopathies. It occurs at a rate ranging between 0.15% and 0.7% per year (depending on the cardiomyopathy), which significantly surpasses SCD incidence in the age- and sex-matched general population. The risk of SCD is affected by multiple factors including the aetiology, genetic basis, age, sex, physical exertion, the extent of myocardial disease severity, conduction system abnormalities, and electrical instability, as measured by various metrics. Over the past decades, the knowledge on the mechanisms and risk factors for SCD has substantially improved, allowing for a better-informed risk stratification. However, unresolved issues still challenge the guidance of SCD prevention in patients with cardiomyopathies. In this review, we aim to provide an in-depth discussion of the contemporary concepts pertinent to understanding the burden, risk assessment and prevention of SCD in cardiomyopathies (dilated, non-dilated left ventricular, hypertrophic, arrhythmogenic right ventricular, and restrictive). The review first focuses on SCD incidence in cardiomyopathies and then summarizes established and emerging risk factors for life-threatening arrhythmias/SCD. Finally, it discusses validated approaches to the risk assessment and evidence-based measures for SCD prevention in cardiomyopathies, pointing to the gaps in evidence and areas of uncertainties that merit future clarification.

Gender Disparities on Access to Care and Coronary Disease Management.

Mortality decline in women to a lesser extent than in men with coronary artery disease (CAD) has provoked a bigger interest in some already existing dilemmas and questions. Many studies carried out in the past three decades did not provide us with precise conclusions. Moreover, various challenges in the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and outcome of CAD in women are still remaining. The meta-analysis and the systematic review conducted in the last years have offered novel approaches to understanding CAD gender disparities in access to care and coronary disease management in women, but women are more likely to experience less favorable short- and long-term outcomes than men do. The reasons for these findings should lie in several known segments in the CAD pathophysiological mechanisms different in women and ultimately leading to a lower quality of care. Clinical presentation in women, which is often characterized by atypical chest pain and a higher prevalence of non-obstructive CAD when evaluated invasively, places women to the false-negative diagnosis of CAD and influences inadequate access to care. Clinical presentation and diagnostic methods, as well as the appropriate treatment options insufficiently examined in women, need to be better defined. The traditional CAD risk factors have a greater impact on women than on men. Unique CAD risk factors only seen in women, have recently been recognized with more attention. However, it is important to note that even in women with obstructive CAD and typical clinical presentation, invasive therapy and pharmacologic therapy are not always implemented as recommended by guidelines as in men. Women are underrepresented in CAD trials, and in current guidelines, gender differences in CAD management have not yet been justified. The underestimation of the risk of CAD in women, followed by its underdiagnosis and undertreatment, might be one of the reasons for a worse prognosis in women in comparison with men.

B-type Natriuretic Peptide and RISK-PCI Score in the Risk Assessment in Patients with STEMI Treated by Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

BACKGROUND: RISK-PCI score is a novel score for risk stratification of patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and the RISK-PCI score for early risk assessment in patients with STEMI treated by pPCI. METHODS: In 120 patients with STEMI treated by pPCI, BNP was measured on admission before pPCI. The primary end point was 30-day mortality. RESULTS: The ROC curve analysis revealed that the most powerful predictive factors of 30-day mortality were the plasma level of BNP ≥ 206.6 pg/mL with the sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 87.5% and the RISK-PCI score ≥ 5.25 with the sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 85.7%. Thirty-day mortality was 6.7%. After multivariate adjustment, admission BNP (≥ 206.6 pg/mL) (OR 2.952, 95% CI 1.072 - 8.133, p = 0.036) and the RISK-PCI score (≥ 5.25) (OR 2.284, 95% CI 1.140-4.578, p = 0.020) were independent predictors of 30-day mortality. The area under the ROC curve using the RISK-PCI score and BNP to detect mortality was 0.828 (p = 0.002) and 0.903 (p < 0.001), respectively. Addition of BNP to RISK-PCI score increased the area under the ROC to 0.949 (p < 0.001), but this increase measured by the c-statistic was not significant (p = 0.107). Furthermore, the significant improvement in risk reclassification (p < 0.001) and the integrated discrimination index (p = 0.042) were observed with the addition of BNP to RISK-PCI score for 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: BNP on admission and the RISK-PCI score were the independent predictors of 30-day mortality in patients with the STEMI treated by pPCI. BNP in combination with the RISK-PCI score showed the way to more accurate risk assessment in patients with STEMI treated by pPCI.