Relationship between aetiology and left ventricular systolic dysfunction in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Background: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a common cardiac disease caused by a range of genetic and acquired disorders. The most common cause is genetic variation in sarcomeric proteins genes. Current ESC guidelines suggest that particular clinical features (‘red flags’) assist in differential diagnosis. Aims: To test the hypothesis that left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction in the presence of increased wall thickness is an age-specific ‘red flag’ for aetiological diagnosis and to determine long-term outcomes in adult patients with various types of HCM. Methods: A cohort of 1697 adult patients with HCM followed at two European referral centres were studied. Aetiological diagnosis was based on clinical examination, cardiac imaging and targeted genetic and biochemical testing. Main outcomes were: all-cause mortality or heart transplantation (HTx) and heart failure (HF) related-death. All-cause mortality included sudden cardiac death or equivalents, HF and stroke-related death and non-cardiovascular death. Results: Prevalence of different aetiologies was as follows: sarcomeric HCM 1288 (76%); AL amyloidosis 115 (7%), hereditary TTR amyloidosis 86 (5%), Anderson-Fabry disease 85 (5%), wild-type TTR amyloidosis 48 (3%), Noonan syndrome 15 (0.9%), mitochondrial disease 23 (1%), Friedreich’s ataxia 11 (0.6%), glycogen storage disease 16 (0.9%), LEOPARD syndrome 7 (0.4%), FHL1 2 (0.1%) and CPT II deficiency 1 (0.1%). Systolic dysfunction at first evaluation was significantly more frequent in phenocopies than sarcomeric HCM [105/409 (26%) versus 40/1288 (3%), (p<0.0001)]. All-cause mortality/HTx and HF-related death were higher in phenocopies compared to sarcomeric HCM (p<0.001, respectively). When considering specific aetiologies, all-cause mortality and HF-related death were higher in cardiac amyloidosis (p<0.001, respectively). Conclusion: Systolic dysfunction at first evaluation is more common in phenocopies compared to sarcomeric HCM representing an age-specific ‘red flag’ for differential diagnosis. Long-term prognosis was more severe in phenocopies compared to sarcomeric HCM and when comparing specific aetiologies, cardiac amyloidosis showed the worse outcomes.

Non-invasive detection of acute cell-mediated graft rejection in paediatric heart transplant recipients: the role of cardiovascular magnetic resonance

Background and Aim: Acute cardiac rejection is currently diagnosed by endomyocardial biopsy (EMB), but multiparametric cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) may be a non-invasive alternative by its capacity for myocardial structure and function characterization. Our primary aim was to determine the utility of multiparametric CMR in identifying acute graft rejection in paediatric heart transplant recipients. The second aim was to compare textural features of parametric maps in cases of rejection versus those without rejection. Methods: Fifteen patients were prospectively enrolled for contrast-enhanced CMR followed by EMB and right heart catheterization. Images were acquired on a 1,5 Tesla scanner including T1 mapping (modified Look-Locker inversion recovery sequence – MOLLI) and T2 mapping (modified GraSE sequence). The extracellular volume (ECV) was calculated using pre- and post-gadolinium T1 times of blood and myocardium and the patient’s hematocrit. Markers of graft dysfunction including hemodynamic measurements from echocardiography, catheterization and CMR were collated. Patients were divided into two groups based on degree of rejection at EMB: no rejection with no change in treatment (Group A) and acute rejection requiring new therapy (Group B). Statistical analysis included student’t t test and Pearson correlation. Results: Acute rejection was diagnosed in five patients. Mean T1 values were significantly associated with acute rejection. A monotonic, increasing trend was noted in both mean and peak T1 values, with increasing degree of rejection. ECV was significantly higher in Group B. There was no difference in T2 signal between two groups. Conclusion: Multiparametric CMR serves as a noninvasive screening tool during surveillance encounters and may be used to identify those patients that may be at higher risk of rejection and therefore require further evaluation. Future and multicenter studies are necessary to confirm these results and explore whether multiparametric CMR can decrease the number of surveillance EMBs in paediatric heart transplant recipients.