Loading…

Severe Cardiac Conduction Disturbances and Pacemaker Implantation in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of severe cardiac conduction disturbances in a cohort of 451 patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and to describe the characteristics of, and outcomes in, those who required a permanent pacemaker. A pacemaker was implanted in 48 patients (...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Revista española de cardiología (English ed.) 2010, Vol.63 (8), p.985-988
Main Authors: Barriales-Villa, Roberto, Centurión-Inda, Raúl, Fernández-Fernández, Xusto, Ortiz, Martín F., Pérez-Álvarez, Luisa, García, Isabel Rodríguez, Hermida-Prieto, Manuel, Monserrat, Lorenzo
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of severe cardiac conduction disturbances in a cohort of 451 patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and to describe the characteristics of, and outcomes in, those who required a permanent pacemaker. A pacemaker was implanted in 48 patients (11%): 20 had sinus node dysfunction and 28 had an atrioventricular conduction disturbance. Primary bradyarrhythmia (which was not related to iatrogenic atrioventricular block or therapeutic ablation of the atrioventricular node) was the reason for permanent pacemaker implantation in 36 patients (8%). In 18% of cases, at least one other family member had a permanent pacemaker. In this patient series, a high prevalence of severe cardiac conduction disturbance leading to permanent pacemaker implantation was observed. Severe cardiac conduction disturbance in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy may also have a familial component. El objetivo de este estudio es analizar la prevalencia de trastornos graves de la conducción cardiaca en una cohorte de 451 pacientes con miocardiopatía hipertrófica, describiendo las características y la evolución de aquellos que requirieron marcapasos. En 48 pacientes (11%) se implantó un marcapasos: 20 casos por disfunción del nodo sinusal y 28 casos por trastorno de la conducción auriculoventricular. Las bradiarritmias primarias (las no relacionadas con bloqueo auriculoventricular iatrogénico o ablación terapéutica del nodo auriculoventricular) fueron causa de implante en 36 pacientes (8%). En un 18% se detectó un marcapasos en al menos otro miembro de la familia. En nuestra serie, encontramos una elevada prevalencia de trastornos graves de la conducción cardiaca que determinaron el implante de marcapasos. Los trastornos severos de la conducción en la miocardiopatía hipertrófica tienen también una presentación familiar.
ISSN:1885-5857
1885-5857
DOI:10.1016/S1885-5857(10)70192-4