Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy

致心律失常性右心室心肌病
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Practice Guideline
    鉴于当前时代心血管可植入电子设备(CIED)和患者的复杂性日益增加,实践指南,根据需要,变得越来越具体。本文件是一项专家共识声明,旨在更新和进一步描述儿科患者CIED的适应症和管理。定义为≤21岁,并旨在主要关注特定疾病类别中CIED的适应症。该文件还强调了以前发表的成人和儿科CIED建议之间的差异,并为潜在的重要差异提供了理由。该文件讨论了低收入和中等收入国家对CIED获取的一些阻碍因素以及规避这些因素的策略。文件部分由写作委员会成员根据他们的专业知识进行划分和起草。这些建议代表了整个写作委员会的共识意见,按推荐类别和证据级别分级。本文件中涉及的几个问题要么不适合临床试验,要么是罕见的疾病实体,在这些情况下,建议是基于一致的专家意见。此外,具体建议,即使有大量数据支持,不要取代临床判断和患者特定决策的需要。这些建议已向儿科及先天性电生理学会(PACES)成员公开征询公众意见,并接受心律学会(HRS)科学及临床文件委员会的外部审查,美国心脏协会(AHA)的科学咨询和协调委员会,美国心脏病学会(ACC),和欧洲儿科和先天性心脏病协会(AEPC)。该文件获得了所有合作者和亚太心律协会(APHRS)的认可,印度心脏节律学会(IHRS),和拉丁美洲心律协会(LAHRS)。该文件有望为临床医生和患者提供支持,以允许适当的CIED使用,适当的CIED管理,并对儿科患者进行适当的CIED随访。
    In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Practice Guideline
    In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    鉴于当前时代心血管可植入电子设备(CIED)和患者的复杂性日益增加,实践指南,根据需要,变得越来越具体。本文件是一项专家共识声明,旨在更新和进一步描述儿科患者CIED的适应症和管理。定义为≤21岁,并旨在主要关注特定疾病类别中CIED的适应症。该文件还强调了以前发表的成人和儿科CIED建议之间的差异,并为潜在的重要差异提供了理由。该文件讨论了低收入和中等收入国家对CIED获取的一些阻碍因素以及规避这些因素的策略。文件部分由写作委员会成员根据他们的专业知识进行划分和起草。这些建议代表了整个写作委员会的共识意见,按推荐类别和证据级别分级。本文件中涉及的几个问题要么不适合临床试验,要么是罕见的疾病实体,在这些情况下,建议是基于一致的专家意见。此外,具体建议,即使有大量数据支持,不要取代临床判断和患者特定决策的需要。这些建议已向儿科及先天性电生理学会(PACES)成员公开征询公众意见,并接受心律学会(HRS)科学及临床文件委员会的外部审查,美国心脏协会(AHA)的科学咨询和协调委员会,美国心脏病学会(ACC),和欧洲儿科和先天性心脏病协会(AEPC)。该文件获得了所有合作者和亚太心律协会(APHRS)的认可,印度心脏节律学会(IHRS),和拉丁美洲心律协会(LAHRS)。该文件有望为临床医生和患者提供支持,以允许适当的CIED使用,适当的CIED管理,并对儿科患者进行适当的CIED随访。
    In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    鉴于当前时代心血管可植入电子设备(CIED)和患者的复杂性日益增加,实践指南,根据需要,变得越来越具体。本文件是一项专家共识声明,旨在更新和进一步描述儿科患者CIED的适应症和管理。定义为≤21岁,并旨在主要关注特定疾病类别中CIED的适应症。该文件还强调了以前发表的成人和儿科CIED建议之间的差异,并为潜在的重要差异提供了理由。该文件讨论了低收入和中等收入国家对CIED获取的一些阻碍因素以及规避这些因素的策略。文件部分由写作委员会成员根据他们的专业知识进行划分和起草。这些建议代表了整个写作委员会的共识意见,按推荐类别和证据级别分级。本文件中涉及的几个问题要么不适合临床试验,要么是罕见的疾病实体,在这些情况下,建议是基于一致的专家意见。此外,具体建议,即使有大量数据支持,不要取代临床判断和患者特定决策的需要。这些建议已向儿科及先天性电生理学会(PACES)成员公开征询公众意见,并接受心律学会(HRS)科学及临床文件委员会的外部审查,美国心脏协会(AHA)的科学咨询和协调委员会,美国心脏病学会(ACC),和欧洲儿科和先天性心脏病协会(AEPC)。该文件获得了所有合作者和亚太心律协会(APHRS)的认可,印度心脏节律学会(IHRS),和拉丁美洲心律协会(LAHRS)。该文件有望为临床医生和患者提供支持,以允许适当的CIED使用,适当的CIED管理,并对儿科患者进行适当的CIED随访。
    In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    致心律失常性心肌病(ACM)是一种不继发于缺血性,高血压,或者心脏瓣膜病.ACM包含了广泛的遗传,系统性,传染性,和炎症性疾病。此名称包括,但不限于,致心律失常右心室/左心室心肌病,心脏淀粉样变性,结节病,查加斯病,和左心室不紧密。ACM表型与其他心肌病重叠,尤其是伴有心律失常的扩张型心肌病,可能与心室扩张和/或收缩功能受损有关。该专家共识声明为临床医生提供了有关ACM评估和管理的指导,并包括有关遗传学和疾病机制的临床相关信息。PICO问题被用来评估当代证据,并提供与致心律失常性右心室心肌病运动相关的临床指导。建议由专家编写小组制定和批准,在用证据表进行系统的文献检索后,讨论他们自己的临床经验,介绍该领域的最新知识。每个建议都是使用美国心脏病学会和美国心脏协会制定的建议类别和证据水平系统提出的,并附有参考文献和解释性文本,以提供必要的上下文。对ACM遗传基础的持续认识为检查疾病和心律失常发展的多种触发因素和潜在的共同途径提供了机会。
    Arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy (ACM) is an arrhythmogenic disorder of the myocardium not secondary to ischemic, hypertensive, or valvular heart disease. ACM incorporates a broad spectrum of genetic, systemic, infectious, and inflammatory disorders. This designation includes, but is not limited to, arrhythmogenic right/left ventricular cardiomyopathy, cardiac amyloidosis, sarcoidosis, Chagas disease, and left ventricular noncompaction. The ACM phenotype overlaps with other cardiomyopathies, particularly dilated cardiomyopathy with arrhythmia presentation that may be associated with ventricular dilatation and/or impaired systolic function. This expert consensus statement provides the clinician with guidance on evaluation and management of ACM and includes clinically relevant information on genetics and disease mechanisms. PICO questions were utilized to evaluate contemporary evidence and provide clinical guidance related to exercise in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Recommendations were developed and approved by an expert writing group, after a systematic literature search with evidence tables, and discussion of their own clinical experience, to present the current knowledge in the field. Each recommendation is presented using the Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence system formulated by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association and is accompanied by references and explanatory text to provide essential context. The ongoing recognition of the genetic basis of ACM provides the opportunity to examine the diverse triggers and potential common pathway for the development of disease and arrhythmia.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy (ACM) is an arrhythmogenic disorder of the myocardium not secondary to ischemic, hypertensive, or valvular heart disease. ACM incorporates a broad spectrum of genetic, systemic, infectious, and inflammatory disorders. This designation includes, but is not limited to, arrhythmogenic right/left ventricular cardiomyopathy, cardiac amyloidosis, sarcoidosis, Chagas disease, and left ventricular noncompaction. The ACM phenotype overlaps with other cardiomyopathies, particularly dilated cardiomyopathy with arrhythmia presentation that may be associated with ventricular dilatation and/or impaired systolic function. This expert consensus statement provides the clinician with guidance on evaluation and management of ACM and includes clinically relevant information on genetics and disease mechanisms. PICO questions were utilized to evaluate contemporary evidence and provide clinical guidance related to exercise in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Recommendations were developed and approved by an expert writing group, after a systematic literature search with evidence tables, and discussion of their own clinical experience, to present the current knowledge in the field. Each recommendation is presented using the Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence system formulated by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association and is accompanied by references and explanatory text to provide essential context. The ongoing recognition of the genetic basis of ACM provides the opportunity to examine the diverse triggers and potential common pathway for the development of disease and arrhythmia.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    OBJECTIVE: To analyze the statistical biases in the studies used to derive cardiac magnetic resonance-based major and minor criteria for the diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC).
    METHODS: ARVC is a rare disorder of the heart that can lead to sudden death in young adults. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) plays a role in the diagnosis by contributing to the criteria set by experts. The original criteria emphasized qualitative analysis of CMR. The criteria were modified in 2010 to provide quantitative cutoffs.
    RESULTS: We apply the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool for systematic review of diagnostic accuracy to the studies cited in the guidelines written in 1994 and revised in 2010. We use the signaling questions in QUADAS-2 to identify different types of statistical bias.
    CONCLUSIONS: The studies have understandable biases that affect the sensitivity and specificity of CMR in the diagnosis of ARVC, as well as the truth of the disease state. There is potential to overdiagnose ARVC particularly in low prevalence populations.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

公众号