Search

Aims Since its emergence in early 2020, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has reached pandemic levels, and there have been repeated outbreaks across the globe. The aim of this two-part series is to provide practical knowledge and guidance to aid clinicians in the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in association with COVID-19. Methods and results A narrative literature review of the available evidence has been performed, and the resulting information has been organized into two parts. The first, reported here, focuses on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis of cardiovascular (CV) conditions that may be manifest in patients with COVID-19. The second part, which will follow in a later edition of the journal, addresses the topics of care pathways, treatment, and follow-up of CV conditions in patients with COVID-19. Conclusion This comprehensive review is not a formal guideline but rather a document that provides a summary of current knowledge and guidance to practicing clinicians managing patients with CVD and COVID-19. The recommendations are mainly the result of observations and personal experience from healthcare providers. Therefore, the information provided here may be subject to change with increasing knowledge, evidence from prospective studies, and changes in the pandemic. Likewise, the guidance provided in the document should not interfere with recommendations provided by local and national healthcare authorities. [GRAPHICS] .

Background: Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is associated with ventricular arrhythmias (VA) and sudden cardiac death (SCD). A model was recently developed to predict incident sustained VA in patients with ARVC. However, since this outcome may overestimate the risk for SCD, we aimed to specifically predict life-threatening VA (LTVA) as a closer surrogate for SCD. Methods: We assembled a retrospective cohort of definite ARVC cases from 15 centers in North America and Europe. Association of 8 prespecified clinical predictors with LTVA (SCD, aborted SCD, sustained, or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator treated ventricular tachycardia >250 beats per minute) in follow-up was assessed by Cox regression with backward selection. Candidate variables included age, sex, prior sustained VA (≥30s, hemodynamically unstable, or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator treated ventricular tachycardia; or aborted SCD), syncope, 24-hour premature ventricular complexes count, the number of anterior and inferior leads with T-wave inversion, left and right ventricular ejection fraction. The resulting model was internally validated using bootstrapping. Results: A total of 864 patients with definite ARVC (40±16 years; 53% male) were included. Over 5.75 years (interquartile range, 2.77-10.58) of follow-up, 93 (10.8%) patients experienced LTVA including 15 with SCD/aborted SCD (1.7%). Of the 8 prespecified clinical predictors, only 4 (younger age, male sex, premature ventricular complex count, and number of leads with T-wave inversion) were associated with LTVA. Notably, prior sustained VA did not predict subsequent LTVA (P=0.850). A model including only these 4 predictors had an optimism-corrected C-index of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.69-0.80) and calibration slope of 0.95 (95% CI, 0.94-0.98) indicating minimal over-optimism. Conclusions: LTVA events in patients with ARVC can be predicted by a novel simple prediction model using only 4 clinical predictors. Prior sustained VA and the extent of functional heart disease are not associated with subsequent LTVA events.

Objectives The prevalence of Anderson–Fabry disease (AFD) in patients presenting with unexplained left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is controversial. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of AFD in a large, consecutive cohort of patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) using rapid mutation screening. Design, Setting and Patients A European multicentre cross-sectional study involving 13 referral centres. Inclusion criteria for the study were: men aged at least 35 years and women aged at least 40 years with unexplained LVH (maximum left ventricular wall thickness ≥1.5 cm). All patients were screened using a denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography protocol for rapid mutation screening of the α-galactosidase A (α-Gal A) gene and, if a sequence variant was found, direct sequencing was performed. 1386 patients (63.9% men, mean age 57.9±12.0 years) were enrolled in the study. Results Seven (0.5%) patients (age 57.4±9.0 years (45–72); three (43%) men) had pathogenic α-galactosidase A mutations. Polymorphisms were identified in 283 patients (20.4%). Maximal left ventricular wall thickness in patients carrying a disease-causing mutation was 18±2 mm (range 15–22); four patients had concentric LVH and the remainder had asymmetric septal hypertrophy. Conclusions The prevalence of AFD gene mutations in a large, consecutive cohort of European patients with unexplained LVH is 0.5%.

Coronary artery disease (CAD) has a significant genetic contribution that is incompletely characterized. To complement genome-wide association (GWA) studies, we conducted a large and systematic candidate gene study of CAD susceptibility, including analysis of many uncommon and functional variants. We examined 49,094 genetic variants in ∼2,100 genes of cardiovascular relevance, using a customised gene array in 15,596 CAD cases and 34,992 controls (11,202 cases and 30,733 controls of European descent; 4,394 cases and 4,259 controls of South Asian origin). We attempted to replicate putative novel associations in an additional 17,121 CAD cases and 40,473 controls. Potential mechanisms through which the novel variants could affect CAD risk were explored through association tests with vascular risk factors and gene expression. We confirmed associations of several previously known CAD susceptibility loci (eg, 9p21.3:p, Author Summary Coronary artery disease (CAD) has a strong genetic basis that remains poorly characterised. Using a custom-designed array, we tested the association with CAD of almost 50,000 common and low frequency variants in ∼2,000 genes of known or suspected cardiovascular relevance. We genotyped the array in 15,596 CAD cases and 34,992 controls (11,202 cases and 30,733 controls of European descent; 4,394 cases and 4,259 controls of South Asian origin) and attempted to replicate putative novel associations in an additional 17,121 CAD cases and 40,473 controls. We report the novel association of variants in or near four genes with CAD and in additional studies identify potential mechanisms by which some of these novel variants affect CAD risk. Interestingly, we found that these variants, as well as the majority of previously reported CAD variants, have similar associations in Europeans and South Asians. Contrary to prior expectations, many previously suggested candidate genes did not show evidence of any effect on CAD risk, and neither did we identify any novel low frequency alleles with strong effects amongst the genes tested. Discovery of novel genes associated with heart disease may help to further understand the aetiology of cardiovascular disease and identify new targets for therapeutic interventions.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of beta-blockers in congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS). Background: Beta-blockers are the mainstay in managing LQTS. Studies comparing the efficacy of commonly used beta-blockers are lacking, and clinicians generally assume they are equally effective. Methods: Electrocardiographic and clinical parameters of 382 LQT1/LQT2 patients initiated on propranolol (n = 134), metoprolol (n = 147), and nadolol (n = 101) were analyzed, excluding patients 480 ms. None of the asymptomatic patients had BCEs. Among symptomatic patients (n = 101), 15 had BCEs (all syncopes). The QTc shortening was significantly less pronounced among patients with BCEs. There was a greater risk of BCEs for symptomatic patients initiated on metoprolol compared to users of the other 2 beta-blockers combined, after adjustment for genotype (odds ratio: 3.95, 95% confidence interval: 1.2 to 13.1, p = 0.025). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a significantly lower event-free survival for symptomatic patients receiving metoprolol compared to propranolol/nadolol. Conclusions: Propranolol has a significantly better QTc shortening effect compared to metoprolol and nadolol, especially in patients with prolonged QTc. Propranolol and nadolol are equally effective, whereas symptomatic patients started on metoprolol are at a significantly higher risk for BCEs. Metoprolol should not be used for symptomatic LQT1 and LQT2 patients.