Fabry Disease Cardiomyopathy: A Review of the Role of Cardiac Imaging from Diagnosis to Treatment.

Fabry disease is a rare X-linked inherited lysosomal storage disorder caused by the absence or reduction of alfa-galactosidase A activity in lysosomes, resulting in accumulation of glycosphingolipids in various tissues. The main organ affected is the heart, which frequently manifests as left ventricular hypertrophy and can ultimately lead to cardiac fibrosis, heart failure, valve disease, cardiac conduction abnormalities and sudden cardiac death. Today we know that myocyte damage starts before these signs and symptoms are detectable on routine studies, during the designated pre-clinical phase of Fabry disease. The initiation of specific therapy for Fabry disease during the early stages of the disease has a great impact on the prognosis of these patients avoiding progression to irreversible fibrosis and preventing cardiovascular complications. Cardiac imaging has become an essential tool in the management of Fabry disease as it can help physicians suspect the disorder, diagnose patients in the early stages and improve outcomes. The recent development of novel imaging techniques makes necessary an update on the subject. This review discusses the role of multimodal imaging in the diagnosis, staging, patient selection for treatment and prognosis of Fabry disease and discusses recent advances in imaging techniques that provide new insights into the pathogenesis of the disorder and the possibility of novel treatment targets.

High medium-term incidence of major cardiovascular events in discharged patients with unstable angina.

The introduction of high-sensitivity troponin (hsTn) assays has reduced the diagnosis of unstable angina (UA) in favor of non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) in the context of non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS). It is unclear whether the detection of these hsTn levels affects the prognosis and therefore whether a different therapeutic approach is warranted. This study aims to determine whether using hsTn results in medium-term prognostic differences in patients with UA and NSTEMI. Methods: This multicenter, prospective registry study included consecutive patients who underwent hsTn assays and were discharged with a diagnosis of NSTEACS. Patients were followed for two years. Outcomes were the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal ischemic stroke), major bleeding, and all-cause mortality. Results: Patients with UA and NSTEMI did not show differences in terms of the invasive interventions received, the coronary artery disease diagnosed, the type of revascularization performed, or the proportion presenting MACE (UA 18.1% vs. NSTEMI 18.9%; p = 0.79). However, patients with NSTEMI had higher cardiovascular mortality at two years (UA 4% vs. NSTEMI 9.2%; p = 0.012), as well as, all-cause mortality (UA vs. 7.9% vs. NSTEMI 16.4%; p = 0.002). Conclusions: Medium-term incidence of MACE was similar in patients with UA and NSTEMI, but cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in NSTEMI patients was over twice that of patients with UA.