Key result
Rhythm control therapy will be evaluated in a prospective, observational, multi-center study to determine the prevalence and time course of arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy in patients with tachycardia and newly diagnosed left ventricular systolic dysfunction.
Why the study?
Arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy can only be diagnosed retrospectively ex juvantibus, prompting the need to determine its prevalence and time course in patients with tachycardia and newly diagnosed, unexplained LVSD.
What is the prevalence of and time to recovery from arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy in patients with newly diagnosed unexplained left ventricular systolic dysfunction and coexisting tachyarrhythmia?
Observational (n=64)
Yes
What is the prevalence of and time to recovery from arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy in patients with newly diagnosed unexplained left ventricular systolic dysfunction and coexisting tachyarrhythmia?
This study protocol outlines a prospective, multi-center observational trial to determine the prevalence and time course of recovery of arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy in patients with unexplained left ventricular systolic dysfunction and tachyarrhythmia.
Background : Arrhythmias and heart failure in form of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) frequently coexist. Arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy (AIC) by definition is a state of reversible LVSD caused by supraventricular or ventricular arrhythmia. Diagnosis of AIC only can be made retrospectively ex juvantibus , and thus deserves consideration. Our aim is to determine prevalence and time course of AIC in patients presenting with tachycardia and newly diagnosed, unexplained LVSD. Methods : In this prospective, observational, investigator-initiated, multi-center trial, we screen for patients with LVSD (left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50%) and tachyarrhythmia (HR > 100/min). After effective rhythm restoration, they are followed-up at 2, 4 and 6 months to evaluate clinical characteristics, biomarkers and cardiac imaging. Left ventricular morphology and function are assessed with transthoracic echocardiography, and left ventricular scar is quantified with cardia magnetic resonance imaging. Additionally, quality of life is measured with a questionnaire (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure). Unconventionally, the group assignment was done after the last follow-up visit ( diagnosis ex juvantibus ). Patients, whose LVEF recovered from LVSD, i.e. increases by ≥15% vs. baseline or increases to ≥50% with an absolute increase of ≥10% were assigned to the AIC group (arm 1). All other patients serve as comparator (arm 2, non-AIC group). Next, prevalence (equals the number of patients in arm 1 divided by the total number of patients) and time to recovery from AIC (time of follow-up visit, in which the LVEF recovered) were calculated and initial morphologic and functional parameters analyzed for predictive power of an AIC. Discussion : We investigate the prevalence of and the time to recovery from AIC in a clinically relevant cohort of patients with newly diagnosed and otherwise unexplainable LVSD and coexisting tachyarrhythmia. Results will help to establish correct diagnoses, describe the frequency of this disease, and possibly identify predictors for AIC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schach et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy (AIC) and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) (n=64). Rhythm control (electrical cardioversion, pharmacological cardioversion, or electrophysiological ablation therapy) vs. Non-AIC group (patients whose LVEF does not recover) was evaluated on Prevalence of AIC (percentage of patients recovering from LVSD after rhythm restoration) and time required to recover from LVSD. Rhythm control therapy will be evaluated in a prospective, observational, multi-center study to determine the prevalence and time course of arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy in patients with tachycardia and newly diagnosed left ventricular systolic dysfunction.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: