Key result
LBBB in gene-elusive DCM linked to ~7 percentage points fewer major adverse events.
Why the study?
Gene-elusive dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) remains poorly characterised, and although left bundle branch block (LBBB) is more common in gene-elusive DCM, its clinical significance was uncertain.
Does the presence of left bundle branch block or gene-elusive status reduce the composite endpoint of end-stage heart failure or malignant ventricular arrhythmia in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy?
Cohort (n=562)
Does the presence of left bundle branch block or gene-elusive status reduce the composite endpoint of end-stage heart failure or malignant ventricular arrhythmia in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy?
Patients with gene-elusive dilated cardiomyopathy have an overall adverse event risk comparable to TTN cardiomyopathy, but those presenting with left bundle branch block represent a distinct, significantly lower-risk subgroup.
LBBB was associated with lower events in gene-elusive DCM; leaves open its incremental value for risk stratification in prospective cohorts.
Background Genetic testing informs risk stratification in dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), yet likely pathogenic/pathogenic (LP/P) variants are identified in only one-third of patients. Gene-elusive DCM may confer a lower risk of adverse clinical events than genotype-positive disease, but remains poorly characterised. Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is more common in gene-elusive DCM and its clinical significance is uncertain.1 Purpose To characterise outcomes in gene-elusive DCM, identify predictors of adverse events and determine the significance of LBBB in this cohort. Methods Consecutive and unrelated DCM patients undergoing genetic testing and returning no LP/P variants were retrospectively recruited and compared to cohorts of DCM patients carrying LP/P variants in LMNA and TTN for a primary composite endpoint of end-stage heart failure (ESHF) or malignant ventricular arrhythmia (MVA). In the gene-elusive group, baseline predictors of the primary endpoint were evaluated, and outcomes stratified by the presence or absence of LBBB. Results Among patients without baseline MVA, the primary endpoint occurred in 36/423 (8.5%) of gene-elusive, 14/39 (35.9%) LMNA and 11/100 (11%) TTN cardiomyopathy patients (log-rank p < 0.001 for LMNA vs gene-elusive and LMNA vs TTN; p = 0.96 for TTN vs gene-elusive) during a median of 49 months of follow-up (Figure 1). For the gene-elusive group, lower left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction, larger LV end-diastolic diameter, ventricular ectopy on ECG and absence of LBBB were independently associated with the primary endpoint, including when accounting for cardiac resynchronisation therapy as a time-varying covariate. Of 414 gene-elusive patients with baseline electrocardiograms, 35 (8.5%) experienced the primary endpoint during follow-up: 31/302 (10.3%) without LBBB and 4/112 (3.6%) with LBBB (log-rank p = 0.02; Figure 2). Conclusions Gene-elusive DCM patients have a risk of adverse events similar to TTN cardiomyopathy. Gene-elusive patients with LBBB are a particularly low-risk subgroup, which may reflect a distinct aetiology of LVSD independent of primary myocardial disease. Further research is needed to understand this phenotype and its response to prognostic heart failure therapies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cannie et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) (n=562). Left bundle branch block (LBBB) in gene-elusive DCM vs. Absence of LBBB in gene-elusive DCM was evaluated on Primary composite endpoint of end-stage heart failure (ESHF) or malignant ventricular arrhythmia (MVA) (p=0.02). Left bundle branch block in gene-elusive dilated cardiomyopathy was associated with a lower rate of end-stage heart failure or malignant ventricular arrhythmia (3.6% vs 10.3%; log-rank p=0.02).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: