loading page

Characteristics of the Phenotype of Mixed Cardiomyopathy in Patients with Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators
  • +9
  • Rajeev Kumar Pathak,
  • Deep Raja,
  • Indira Samarawickrema,
  • Sarat Krishna Menon,
  • Rikvin Singh,
  • Abhinav Mehta,
  • Lukah Tuan,
  • ULHAS PANDURANGI,
  • David J. Callans,
  • Francis E. Marchlinski,
  • Walter P. Abhayaratna,
  • Prashanthan Sanders
Rajeev Kumar Pathak
Australian National University

Corresponding Author:rajeev.pathak@canberraheartrhythm.com.au

Author Profile
Deep Raja
Australian National University
Author Profile
Indira Samarawickrema
Australian Capital Territory
Author Profile
Sarat Krishna Menon
Australian Capital Territory
Author Profile
Rikvin Singh
Australian National University
Author Profile
Abhinav Mehta
Australian National University
Author Profile
Lukah Tuan
Australian Capital Territory
Author Profile
ULHAS PANDURANGI
Madras Medical Mission
Author Profile
David J. Callans
Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania
Author Profile
Francis E. Marchlinski
Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania
Author Profile
Walter P. Abhayaratna
Australian National University
Author Profile
Prashanthan Sanders
The University of Adelaide Centre for Heart Rhythm Disorders
Author Profile

Abstract

Introduction: The prognosis of mixed cardiomyopathy (CMP) in patients with implanted cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) has not been investigated. We aim to study the demographic, clinical, device therapies and survival characteristics of mixed CMP in a cohort of patients implanted with a defibrillator. Methods: The term mixed CMP was used to categorise patients with impaired left ventricular ejection fraction attributed to documented non-ischemic triggers with concomitant moderate coronary artery disease. This is a single center observational cohort of 526 patients with a mean follow-up 8.7±3.5 years. Results: There were 42.5% patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM), 26.9% with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) and 30.6% with mixed CMP. Mixed CMP, compared to NICM, was associated with higher mean age (69.1±9.6 years), atrial fibrillation (55.3%) and greater incidence of comorbidities. The proportion of patients with mixed CMP receiving device shocks was 23.6% compared to 18.4% in NICM and 27% in ICM. The VT cycle length recorded in mixed CMP (281.6 ± 43.1ms) was comparable with ICM (282.5 ± 44ms; p=0.9) and lesser than NICM (297.7 ± 48.7ms; p=0.1). All-cause mortality in mixed CMP (21.1%) was similar to ICM (20.1%; p=0.8) and higher than NICM (15.6%; p=0.2). Kaplan-Meier curves revealed hazards of 1.57 (95% CI: 0.91, 2.68) for mixed CMP compared to NICM. Conclusion: In a cohort of patients with ICD, the group with mixed CMP represent a phenotype predominantly comprised of elderly with higher incidence of comorbidities. Mixed CMP resembles ICM in terms of number of device shocks and VT cycle length. Long-term prognosis of patients with mixed CMP is worse than NICM and similar to ICM.