Key result
Clinical screening of relatives of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy identified a 25% prevalence of familial non-X-linked disease and enabled early diagnosis in 23 asymptomatic relatives.
Why the study?
What is the prevalence and clinical characteristics of familial non-X-linked dilated cardiomyopathy among relatives of index patients?
Observational (n=576)
What is the prevalence and clinical characteristics of familial non-X-linked dilated cardiomyopathy among relatives of index patients?
Screening relatives of patients with non-X-linked dilated cardiomyopathy reveals a 25% prevalence of familial disease and enables early diagnosis of asymptomatic affected individuals.
Supports family screening in dilated cardiomyopathy; leaves open long-term outcome benefits pending prospective data.
AIMS: To assess the prevalence of familial non-X-linked dilated cardiomyopathy, to diagnose early asymptomatic cases evaluate inheritance and characterize clinical phenotypes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We screened 472 relatives of 104 consecutive patients diagnosed with dilated cardiomyopathy; males with X-linked dilated cardiomyopathy were excluded based on systematic immunohistochemical and molecular analysis. Relatives underwent clinical examination, electrocardiography, echocardiography and serum creatine-phosphokinase determination. Twenty-six index patients (25%) had familial disease: four youths (< or = 20 years) had rapidly progressive outcome and underwent emergency transplantation. In a sib-pair, the onset was with atrioventricular block. Inheritance was autosomal dominant in 15, undetermined in seven (four sib-pairs); mitochondrial DNA pathological mutations were found in four. The screening identified 23 newly diagnosed relatives in the familial group. Transplantation (P = 0.04) and atrial fibrillation (P = 0.04) were more frequent, and left bundle branch block (P = 0.04) less frequent in index patients with familial than in those with non-familial disease. Several non-affected relatives had instrumental abnormalities potentially useful as pre-clinical markers: their prevalence was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of familial, non X-linked dilated cardiomyopathy was 25%. The immediate benefits of screening family members of index patients was early diagnosis in unaware symptomless affected relatives.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Antonello Gavazzi (2001) conducted an observational in Familial non-X-linked dilated cardiomyopathy (n=576). Clinical screening was evaluated on Prevalence of familial non-X-linked dilated cardiomyopathy. Clinical screening of relatives of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy identified a 25% prevalence of familial non-X-linked disease and enabled early diagnosis in 23 asymptomatic relatives.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: