Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Revision as of 18:53, 29 September 2012 by C Michael Gibson (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

WikiDoc Resources for Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Articles

Most recent articles on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Most cited articles on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Review articles on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Articles on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy in N Eng J Med, Lancet, BMJ

Media

Powerpoint slides on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Images of Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Photos of Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Podcasts & MP3s on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Videos on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Evidence Based Medicine

Cochrane Collaboration on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Bandolier on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

TRIP on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Clinical Trials

Ongoing Trials on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy at Clinical Trials.gov

Trial results on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Clinical Trials on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy at Google

Guidelines / Policies / Govt

US National Guidelines Clearinghouse on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

NICE Guidance on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

NHS PRODIGY Guidance

FDA on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

CDC on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Books

Books on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

News

Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy in the news

Be alerted to news on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

News trends on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Commentary

Blogs on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Definitions

Definitions of Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Patient Resources / Community

Patient resources on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Discussion groups on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Patient Handouts on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Directions to Hospitals Treating Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Risk calculators and risk factors for Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Healthcare Provider Resources

Symptoms of Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Causes & Risk Factors for Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Diagnostic studies for Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Treatment of Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Continuing Medical Education (CME)

CME Programs on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

International

Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy en Espanol

Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy en Francais

Business

Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy in the Marketplace

Patents on Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Experimental / Informatics

List of terms related to Cardiology Board Review in cardiomyopathy

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]

Classification

CMPs can be divided into genetic, mixed and acquired ones.

Dilated CMP

  • Look for reversible causes alcohol, hemochromatosis, and soa

Restrictive Cardiomyopathy

  • 5 yr survival only 64%, CCB, diuresis are mainstays. SOmewhat preload dependent. Slow heart rate and may drop CO., transplant may be best option.
  • Atrial bigger than ventricles, hige atria to fill ventricles
  • Little atrial contribution to filling since pressure so high
  • Non-hypertrophied ventricles
  • Restrictive physiology not the same as restr cmp
  • Classic square root sign

Muscle or Myocardial

Hypereosinophilia

  • Bright endomyocardium on echocardiogram
  • May affect valve function with progressive scarring
  • Mobile scars may require chemotherapy

Amyloid Cardiomyopathy

  • Small volts on EKG
  • Shimmering on Echo
  • Very thick myocardium
  • Often a small pericardial effusion

Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Dysplasia

  • Fibrofatty replacement of RV free wall, almost no muscle left
  • Repol abn on EKG
  • 30% have + FH
  • AICD and avoid athletics

Non-Compaction Cardiomyopathy

  • More commonly diagnoses now
  • Heart muscle does not compact down in utero
  • Beta myosin heavy chain most common
  • See crypts and ressesin wall
  • MRI a good imaging modality
  • Dyspnea is the most common symptom, may not have may sx
  • Increased risk of SCD
  • If systolic function normal: Risk strat for SCD using HCM criteria, treat with stage B CHF
  • Low EF: treat like HCM

Class 2B recommendation fo AICD If +FH, SVT put in AICD

HOCM

  • Thick walls
  • Myocardial disarray
  • Prevalence is 1:500
  • Average age of death not that different than gen pop
  • 1% / ye ris of SCD
  • Autosomal dom inheritacne
  • Contrainidcations to competitive athletics, but can hav e ehalthy lifestyle
  • Meds only to reat symptoms
  • Pt with +FH, 2/6 murmur, brisk carotid upstroke in HCM, apical impulse bifid or trifid, bearin down increases murmur, loud whenyou stand up after qauting, most dynamic of the murmurs, EKG narrow symmetric inverted t waves. 5% have normal ECG.
  • thick walss on echo Ithink amyloid, renal failure, glycogen storage dz, anderson Fabrys, or Fredierichs
  • Athletes heart: does not exist in as many people as you think. 1% have increased will thickness. 18-22 mm is too big. Not common in weekend warriors.

Distinguish HCM vs athletic ehart. More wall than cavity then HOCM,

  • Spetum, base can be involved. THere is an apical variant
  • Apical treated no differently, not benign
  • Genetics:
  • abnromal sarcomere genetics, 14 mutations, dont know final common pathway. 50% of HOCM have a genetic abn. Limits role of testing

genotype doesnt teel you if patient will respon to a therpay Only identifies family memebrs

  • Family screening: screening start at puberty or onset of adolescence if child of an HCM patient, then every yeart ill no longer a athlelet. One time echo not good enough stop in adults at age 60 q 5 years as an adilt. iF a mutation is present in a pt, then screen first degree family memb. If no mutation in a ptiatient, screen family with imaging
  • Mayo approach
  • Echo on every one in Mayo.
  • Exercise stress test. Normal blood pressure resp is to increas 25 m hg. Filure to rise or a drop is associated with SCD. Seocnd tier risk fx. Not a primary dirver to determine need for and AICD.
  • Holter
  • FH
  • Gadolinium: If hyperenchecment then AICD, if neg then no AICD. a tie breaker

Treax

Myectomy

  • LVOT > 40,
  • Symptoms refractory to drugs
  • Operative mortality only 0.5%
  • Gradient goes from 67 to 3 mm Hg

95% become class 1 or 2. Survivla = age matched cohort after myectom Less need for AICD, myectomy patients have less discharge of their AICD Dont tell patients it may save lives, but it might. Drugs before mechanical therapy, mechanical therapy only if drugs fail Used to add CCB after beta blocker, but now could go to myectomy rather than add CCB as in the past. If you fail beta blocker, cna move on to myectomy Sever MR gets better with myectomy, dont need repair (maybe 1% of patients)

Ablation

  • If it works it works as well as myectomy

20-30% dont respond complicaitons like chb in 20% mortalityr ate is 1.9%, not going down, similar to infarcts of same size since we are creating an infarct. if pre-existing LBBB, the ablation wacks out RBB a dn they will need PPM. Younger pts due better with myectomy

Guidelines

  • Indicated if drug refractory symptoms

if surg candidate then myecoty 2a, ablation 2b not surg candate then ablation a 2a indication

Prognosis

  • 1% per year risk of SCD
  • IndependentRisk factors:
  • LVOT obstrution, syncope, worse with exercise
  • serverity of LVH
  • Fibrosis on MRI
  • Fh

Who needs a defib

  • Class 1: Prior CPR
  • Class 2a:

FH SCD, wall > 30 mm, unexplained syncope Non sustained VT and abnormal exercise response and + hyperencehament 2b

Bottom Line

No risk factors: Reassure Prior SCD: AICD Sustained VT: AICD

Pathophysiology

  • Diastolic dysfun in 100%
  • 70% have dynamic obstruction
  • Suendo ischemia
  • MR proportion to gradient
  • Gradient reduces forward CO
  • Sx vary from day to day due to graient, Na intake, temperature. AS sx are constant with constant graient
  • Mitarl vale like your hand hanging out a car and gets pulled back
  • MR anteriorly directed means there may be a primary problemw ith the mitral voalve
  • Sx with reduced pre load and increased contractily



References