Search

Patients with biallelic mutations in the nuclear‐encoded mitochondrial gene C1QBP/p32 have been described with syndromic features and autosomal recessive cardiomyopathy. We describe the clinical course in two siblings who developed cardiomyopathy and ventricular fibrillation in infancy. We provide genomic analysis and clinical‐pathologic correlation. Both siblings had profound cardiac failure with ventricular arrhythmia. One child died suddenly. The second sibling survived resuscitation but required extracorporeal cardiopulmonary support and died shortly afterward. On cardiac autopsy, the left ventricle was hypertrophied in both children. Histological examination revealed prominent cardiomyocyte cytoplasmic clearing, and electron microscopy confirmed abnormal mitochondrial structure within cardiomyocytes. DNA sequencing revealed compound heterozygous variants in C1QBP (p.Thr40Asnfs*45 and p.Phe204Leu) in both children. Family segregation analysis demonstrated each variant was inherited from an unaffected, heterozygous parent. Inherited loss of C1QBP/p32 is associated with recessive cardiomyopathy, ventricular fibrillation, and sudden death in early life. Ultrastructural mitochondrial evaluation in the second child was similar to findings in engineered C1qbp‐deficient mice. Rapid trio analysis can define rare biallelic variants in genes that may be implicated in sudden death and facilitate medical management and family planning. (184/200). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Educating cardiologists and health care professionals about cardiovascular genetics and genetic testing is essential to improving diagnosis and management of patients with inherited cardiomyopathies and arrhythmias and those at higher risk for sudden cardiac death. The aim of this study was to understand cardiology and electrophysiology practitioners' current practices, confidence, and knowledge surrounding genetic testing in cardiology and desired topics for an educational program. Methods and Results A one-time survey was administered through purposive email solicitation to 131 cardiology practitioners in the United States. Of these, 107 self-identified as nongenetic practitioners. Over three quarters of nongenetic practitioners reported that they refer patients to genetic providers to discuss cardiovascular genetic tests (n=82; 76.6%). More than half of nongenetic practitioners reported that they were not confident about the types of cardiovascular genetic testing available (n=60; 56%) and/or in ordering appropriate cardiovascular genetic tests (n=66; 62%). In addition, 45% (n=22) of nongenetic practitioners did not feel confident making cardiology treatment recommendations based on genetic test results. Among all providers, the most desired topics for an educational program were risk assessment (94%) and management of inherited cardiac conditions based on guidelines (91%). Conclusions This study emphasizes the importance of access to genetics services in the cardiology field and the need for addressing the identified deficit in confidence and knowledge about cardiogenetics and genetic testing among nongenetic providers. Additional research is needed, including more practitioners from underserved areas.