Key result
In patients with primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators, Fabry disease was associated with a significantly higher risk of arrhythmia compared to hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HR 4.2).
Why the study?
Fabry disease leads to progressive cardiac disease, arrhythmia, and premature death, and authors sought to increase awareness of the arrhythmogenicity of Fabry cardiomyopathy by comparing device usage with sarcomeric HCM.
Does Fabry cardiomyopathy have a higher arrhythmogenic burden and rate of ICD therapy compared to hypertrophic cardiomyopathy?
Cohort (n=114)
Yes
Does Fabry cardiomyopathy have a higher arrhythmogenic burden and rate of ICD therapy compared to hypertrophic cardiomyopathy?
Hazard Ratio: 4.2 (95% CI 2–8.6)
p-value: p=<0.001
Fabry cardiomyopathy is associated with a significantly higher burden of ventricular arrhythmias and appropriate ICD therapies compared to hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, suggesting a highly arrhythmogenic phenotype.
Greater arrhythmia burden in Fabry vs sarcomeric HCM; leaves open applicability of existing risk models and needs prospective validation.
BACKGROUND: Fabry disease (FD) is a treatable X-linked condition leading to progressive cardiac disease, arrhythmia and premature death. We aimed to increase awareness of the arrhythmogenicity of Fabry cardiomyopathy, by comparing device usage in patients with Fabry cardiomyopathy and sarcomeric HCM. All Fabry patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implanted in the UK over a 17 year period were included. A comparator group of HCM patients, with primary prevention ICD implantation, were captured from a regional registry database. RESULTS: Indications for ICD in FD varied with 72% implanted for primary prevention based on multiple potential risk factors. In FD and HCM primary prevention devices, arrhythmia occurred more frequently in FD over shorter follow-up (HR 4.2, p < 0.001). VT requiring therapy was more common in FD (HR 4.5, p = 0.002). Immediate shock therapy for sustained VT was also more common (HR 2.5, p < 0.001). There was a greater burden of AF needing anticoagulation and NSVT in FD (AF: HR 6.2, p = 0.004, NSVT: HR 3.1, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates arrhythmia burden and ICD usage in FD is high, suggesting that Fabry cardiomyopathy may be more 'arrhythmogenic' than previously thought. Existing risk models cannot be mutually applicable and further research is needed to provide clarity in managing Fabry patients with cardiac involvement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vijapurapu et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Fabry disease and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (n=114). Fabry disease vs. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy was evaluated on Arrhythmia occurrence in primary prevention devices (HR 4.2, 95% CI 2.0-8.6, p=<0.001). In patients with primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators, Fabry disease was associated with a significantly higher risk of arrhythmia compared to hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HR 4.2).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: