Prevalence of cardiac amyloidosis among elderly patients with systolic heart failure or conduction disorders.

Objective: Cardiac amyloid infiltration can lead to systolic heart failure (HF) or to conduction disorders (CD). Patients with transthyretin (ATTR) amyloidosis are particularly exposed. We sought to determine the prevalence of ATTR and AL among patients >60 years admitted with CD or unexplained systolic HF and increased wall thickness. Materials and Methods: We studied 143 patients (57% males, 79 ± 9 years) with HF (N = 28) or CD requiring pacemaker implantation (N = 115). In total, 139 (97%) patients (28 with HF and 111 with CD) underwent 99mTc-DPD scintigraphy to detect ATTR, and 105 (73%; 19 HF and 86 CD) underwent AL screening. Results: Five patients (4%; 95%CI:0-7%) exhibited wild-type ATTR (ATTRwt) amyloidosis, 2 (2%; 95%CI:0-4%) had CD and 3 (11%; 95%CI:0-23%) HF. No patient showed AL. The 2 ATTRwt patients with CD were previously asymptomatic, did not show classical ECG signs and exhibited mild LV hypertrophy with preserved LVEF. By contrast, all ATTRwt patients with HF had ECG and echocardiographic signs of amyloid. During a mean follow-up of 18 ± 11 months, 3(60%) patients with ATTRwt amyloidosis (1 CD and 2 HF) and 14(10.4%) without died. Conclusion: Prevalence of ATTRwt amyloidosis in patients with CD requiring pacemaker is low. Although, additional studies are needed, prevalence seems to be higher in elderly patients with systolic HF.

Formin Homology 2 Domain Containing 3 (FHOD3) Is a Genetic Basis for Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: The genetic cause of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy remains unexplained in a substantial proportion of cases. Formin homology 2 domain containing 3 (FHOD3) may have a role in the pathogenesis of cardiac hypertrophy but has not been implicated in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the relation between FHOD3 mutations and the development of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. METHODS: FHOD3 was sequenced by massive parallel sequencing in 3,189 hypertrophic cardiomyopathy unrelated probands and 2,777 patients with no evidence of cardiomyopathy (disease control subjects). The authors evaluated protein-altering candidate variants in FHOD3 for cosegregation, clinical characteristics, and outcomes. RESULTS: The authors identified 94 candidate variants in 132 probands. The variants' frequencies were significantly higher in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (74 of 3,189 [2.32%]) than in disease control subjects (18 of 2,777 [0.65%]; p < 0.001) or in the gnomAD database (1,049 of 138,606 [0.76%]; p < 0.001). FHOD3 mutations cosegregated with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in 17 families, with a combined logarithm of the odds score of 7.92, indicative of very strong segregation. One-half of the disease-causing variants were clustered in a small conserved coiled-coil domain (amino acids 622 to 655); odds ratio for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy was 21.8 versus disease control subjects (95% confidence interval: 1.3 to 37.9; p < 0.001) and 14.1 against gnomAD (95% confidence interval: 6.9 to 28.7; p < 0.001). Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients carrying (likely) pathogenic mutations in FHOD3 (n = 70) were diagnosed after age 30 years (mean 46.1 ± 18.7 years), and two-thirds (66%) were males. Of the patients, 82% had asymmetric septal hypertrophy (mean 18.8 ± 5 mm); left ventricular ejection fraction <50% was present in 14% and hypertrabeculation in 16%. Events were rare before age 30 years, with an annual cardiovascular death incidence of 1% during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: FHOD3 is a novel disease gene in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, accounting for approximately 1% to 2% of cases. The phenotype and the rate of cardiovascular events are similar to those reported in unselected cohorts. The FHOD3 gene should be routinely included in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy genetic testing panels.

Impacto pronóstico y factores predictores de la recuperación de la fracción de eyección en pacientes con miocardiopatía dilatada alcohólica / Prognostic impact and predictors of ejection fraction recovery in patients with alcoholic cardiomyopathy

Introducción y objetivos: La recuperación de la fracción de eyección del ventrículo izquierdo (FEVI) está descrita en la miocardiopatía alcohólica (MCA) tras la abstinencia alcohólica. Sin embargo, se desconoce el impacto pronóstico de esta recuperación y los factores con que se asocia. El objetivo es definir el papel pronóstico a largo plazo de la mejoría de la FEVI en la MCA e identificar sus predictores. Métodos: Se evaluó a 101 pacientes con MCA, con una mediana de seguimiento de 82 [intervalo intercuartílico, 36-134] meses. Resultados: Al final del seguimiento, 42 pacientes (42%) mostraron una recuperación significativa de la FEVI, definida como un incremento absoluto ≥ 10% y FEVI final ≥ 40%. Estos pacientes mostraron mejor pronóstico que aquellos sin recuperación de la FEVI (trasplante cardiaco o muerte cardiovascular, el 1 frente al 30%; p < 0,001). La duración del QRS < 120 ms (OR = 6,68; IC95%, 2,30-19,41), el tratamiento bloqueador beta (OR = 3,01; IC95%, 1,09-8,28) y no necesitar diuréticos (OR = 3,35; IC95%, 1,08-10,42) predijeron la recuperación de la FEVI en el análisis multivariable. Aunque el cese del consumo de alcohol no fue predictor, ninguno de los pacientes (n = 6) que mantuvieron un consumo excesivo recuperó la FEVI. Entre los abstemios y quienes mantuvieron un consumo moderado, hubo similar número de pacientes que recuperaron la FEVI (el 44 frente al 45%; p = 0,9). Conclusiones: La recuperación de la FEVI se asocia con un excelente pronóstico en la MCA. El tratamiento con bloqueadores beta, un QRS < 120 ms y no tomar diuréticos son predictores independientes de esta recuperación. La recuperación de la FEVI es similar entre bebedores moderados y abstemios

Introduction and objectives: Recovery of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) has been described in alcoholic cardiomyopathy (ACM) after a period of alcohol withdrawal. Nevertheless, the prognostic impact of LVEF recovery in ACM and its determinants have not been studied. We sought to define the role of LVEF improvement in the long-term outcome of ACM and to identify predictors of LVEF recovery in these patients. Methods: We evaluated 101 ACM patients during a median follow-up period of 82 months [interquartile range 36-134]. Results: At latest follow-up, 42 patients (42%) showed substantial LVEF recovery defined as an absolute increase in LVEF ≥ 10% to a final value of ≥ 40%. Patients who recovered LVEF had better outcomes than patients who did not (heart transplant or cardiovascular death 1% vs 30%; P < .001). A QRS with < 120 ms (OR, 6.68; 95%CI, 2.30-19.41), beta-blocker therapy (OR, 3.01; 95%CI, 1.09-8.28), and the absence of diuretics (OR, 3.35; 95%CI, 1.08-10.42) predicted LVEF recovery in multivariate analysis. Although alcohol cessation did not predict LVEF recovery, none of the patients (n = 6) who persisted with heavy alcohol consumption recovered LVEF. The rate of patients who recovered LVEF did not differ between abstainers and moderate drinkers (44% vs 45%; P = .9). Conclusions: The LVEF recovery is associated with an excellent prognosis in ACM. Beta-blocker treatment, QRS < 120 ms and absence of diuretics are independent predictors of LVEF recovery. LVEF recovery is similar in moderate drinkers and abstainers

Prognostic Impact and Predictors of Ejection Fraction Recovery in Patients With Alcoholic Cardiomyopathy.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Recovery of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) has been described in alcoholic cardiomyopathy (ACM) after a period of alcohol withdrawal. Nevertheless, the prognostic impact of LVEF recovery in ACM and its determinants have not been studied. We sought to define the role of LVEF improvement in the long-term outcome of ACM and to identify predictors of LVEF recovery in these patients. METHODS: We evaluated 101 ACM patients during a median follow-up period of 82 months [interquartile range 36-134]. RESULTS: At latest follow-up, 42 patients (42%) showed substantial LVEF recovery defined as an absolute increase in LVEF ≥ 10% to a final value of ≥ 40%. Patients who recovered LVEF had better outcomes than patients who did not (heart transplant or cardiovascular death 1% vs 30%; P <.001). A QRS with <120ms (OR, 6.68; 95%CI, 2.30-19.41), beta-blocker therapy (OR, 3.01; 95%CI, 1.09-8.28), and the absence of diuretics (OR, 3.35; 95%CI, 1.08-10.42) predicted LVEF recovery in multivariate analysis. Although alcohol cessation did not predict LVEF recovery, none of the patients (n=6) who persisted with heavy alcohol consumption recovered LVEF. The rate of patients who recovered LVEF did not differ between abstainers and moderate drinkers (44% vs 45%; P=.9). CONCLUSIONS: The LVEF recovery is associated with an excellent prognosis in ACM. Beta-blocker treatment, QRS <120ms and absence of diuretics are independent predictors of LVEF recovery. LVEF recovery is similar in moderate drinkers and abstainers.