Key result
An accidental bolus of intravenous adrenaline precipitated cardiogenic shock and mid-ventricular Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, providing evidence for catecholamine toxicity in its pathogenesis.
Why the study?
The pathophysiology of Takotsubo cardiomyopathy remains largely unknown, though catecholamine toxicity is the most widely accepted theory.
Case Report (n=1)
No
This case provides further evidence supporting the notion that catecholamine toxicity is implicated in the pathogenesis of Takotsubo cardiomyopathy.
Atypical TCM variants may broaden differential diagnosis of regional wall motion abnormalities; leaves open standardized classification and outcomes data.
Takotsubo cardiomyopathy (TCM) is regarded as an acute and often reversible cardiac syndrome characterised by apical ballooning of the left ventricle that occurs in the absence of coronary artery obstruction and myocarditis. The underlying pathophysiology remains largely unknown, but the most widely accepted theory is catecholamine toxicity.More recently, atypical variants of TCM have been described, and are characterised by the regional wall motion abnormalities that are observed. Mid-ventricular Takotsubo cardiomyopathy (MVTCM) is characterised by hypokinesia/akinesia of the mid left ventricular wall segments with hyperdynamic basal and apical function. This report describes the first documented case of a patient who developed MVTCM after receiving a dose of intravenous adrenaline. This case provides further evidence to support the notion that catecholamine toxicity is implicated in the pathogenesis of TCM.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Adam Ioannou (2022) conducted a case report in Mid-ventricular Takotsubo cardiomyopathy (n=1). Intravenous adrenaline was evaluated on Development of mid-ventricular Takotsubo cardiomyopathy. An accidental bolus of intravenous adrenaline precipitated cardiogenic shock and mid-ventricular Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, providing evidence for catecholamine toxicity in its pathogenesis.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: