Why the study?
SCN5A mutations cause variable arrhythmogenic syndromes, but the clinical spectrum in pediatric-onset patients remains to be characterized.
In pediatric patients, SCN5A mutations frequently present as overlap syndrome with predominant loss-of-function phenotypes and higher penetrance in males.
Pediatric SCN5A cases may warrant earlier family screening; leaves open ancestry effects on penetrance and expressivity.
Sodium voltage-gated channel α subunit 5 (SCN5A)-mutations may cause an array of arrhythmogenic syndromes most frequently as an autosomal dominant trait, with incomplete penetrance, variable expressivity and male predominance. In the present study, we retrospectively describe a group of Mexican patients with SCN5A-disease causing variants in whom the onset of symptoms occurred in the pediatric age range. The study included 17 patients with clinical diagnosis of primary electrical disease, at least one SCN5A pathogenic or likely pathogenic mutation and age of onset <18 years, and all available first- and second-degree relatives. Fifteen patients (88.2%) were male, and sixteen independent variants were found (twelve missense, three truncating and one complex inframe deletion/insertion). The frequency of compound heterozygosity was remarkably high (3/17, 17.6%), with early childhood onset and severe disease. Overall, 70.6% of pediatric patients presented with overlap syndrome, 11.8% with isolated sick sinus syndrome, 11.8% with isolated Brugada syndrome (BrS) and 5.9% with isolated type 3 long QT syndrome (LQTS). A total of 24/45 SCN5A mutation carriers were affected (overall penetrance 53.3%), and penetrance was higher in males (63.3%, 19 affected/30 mutation carriers) than in females (33.3%, 5 affected/15 carriers). In conclusion, pediatric patients with SCNA-disease causing variants presented mainly as overlap syndrome, with predominant loss-of-function phenotypes of sick sinus syndrome (SSS), progressive cardiac conduction disease (PCCD) and ventricular arrhythmias.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Villarreal‐Molina et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: