Aims: The prognostic significance of detecting left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction during family screening programmes (FSPs) in relatives of probands affected by dilated (DCM) and non-dilated left ventricular (NDLVC) cardiomyopathies remain unclear. This study sought to evaluate the prognostic role of LV systolic dysfunction detection in relatives of DCM/NDLVC probands and to define the most accurate FSP. Methods and results: Baseline and follow-up data of first-degree relatives of probands affected by DCM/NDLVC were collected. The primary outcome was all-cause death and heart transplantation. Secondary heart failure (HF) and arrhythmic outcomes were also included. A total of 492 first degree relatives were enrolled. During a median follow-up of 110 months (interquartile range 57–188 months), only subjects that previously developed LV systolic dysfunction had primary outcomes (19 vs. 0, p < 0.001) and secondary outcomes (HF: 12 vs. 0, p = 0.005; arrhythmic: 30 vs. 0, p < 0.001). Subjects with LV systolic dysfunction detected by FSP showed lower rate of primary outcomes (FSP: n = 19 [14%]; no-FSP: n = 40 [37%]; p < 0.001) and secondary arrhythmic outcomes (FSP: n = 18 [13%]; no-FSP: n = 41 [38%]; p < 0.001). In this setting, family history of arrhythmia and being carrier of a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant are the main risk factors for LV systolic dysfunction, while LV global longitudinal strain (LV-GLS) and Holter electrocardiogram (ECG) showed a relevant role in terms of prediction of LV systolic dysfunction and outcomes. Conclusion: Relatives of DCM/NDLVC probands who developed LV systolic dysfunction during a long follow-up had a significant increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, LV systolic dysfunction detected by FSP showed a better prognosis. In this context, genetics, Holter ECG and LV-GLS demonstrated their functional role for disease and event prediction.
Prediction and prognostic role of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in family screening for dilated cardiomyopathy and non-dilated left ventricular cardiomyopathy / Del Mestre, E., Paldino, A., Pio Loco Detto Gava, C., Gandin, I., Gigli, M., Stolfo, D., Setti, M., Severini, G.M., Spedicati, B., Lenarduzzi, S., Girotto, G., Folgheraiter, A., Rizzi, J.G., Korcova, R., Mestroni, L., Merlo, M., Dal Ferro, M., Sinagra, G.. - In: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEART FAILURE. - ISSN 1879-0844. - 27:12(2025), pp. 3260-3268. [10.1002/ejhf.3657]
Prediction and prognostic role of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in family screening for dilated cardiomyopathy and non-dilated left ventricular cardiomyopathy
Del Mestre, EvaCo-primo
;Paldino, Alessia
Co-primo
;Pio Loco Detto Gava, Carola;Gandin, Ilaria;Gigli, Marta;Stolfo, Davide;Spedicati, Beatrice;Folgheraiter, Alessandro;Rizzi, Jacopo Giulio;Korcova, Renata;Mestroni, Luisa;Merlo, Marco;Dal Ferro, MatteoPenultimo
;Sinagra, GianfrancoUltimo
2025-01-01
Abstract
Aims: The prognostic significance of detecting left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction during family screening programmes (FSPs) in relatives of probands affected by dilated (DCM) and non-dilated left ventricular (NDLVC) cardiomyopathies remain unclear. This study sought to evaluate the prognostic role of LV systolic dysfunction detection in relatives of DCM/NDLVC probands and to define the most accurate FSP. Methods and results: Baseline and follow-up data of first-degree relatives of probands affected by DCM/NDLVC were collected. The primary outcome was all-cause death and heart transplantation. Secondary heart failure (HF) and arrhythmic outcomes were also included. A total of 492 first degree relatives were enrolled. During a median follow-up of 110 months (interquartile range 57–188 months), only subjects that previously developed LV systolic dysfunction had primary outcomes (19 vs. 0, p < 0.001) and secondary outcomes (HF: 12 vs. 0, p = 0.005; arrhythmic: 30 vs. 0, p < 0.001). Subjects with LV systolic dysfunction detected by FSP showed lower rate of primary outcomes (FSP: n = 19 [14%]; no-FSP: n = 40 [37%]; p < 0.001) and secondary arrhythmic outcomes (FSP: n = 18 [13%]; no-FSP: n = 41 [38%]; p < 0.001). In this setting, family history of arrhythmia and being carrier of a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant are the main risk factors for LV systolic dysfunction, while LV global longitudinal strain (LV-GLS) and Holter electrocardiogram (ECG) showed a relevant role in terms of prediction of LV systolic dysfunction and outcomes. Conclusion: Relatives of DCM/NDLVC probands who developed LV systolic dysfunction during a long follow-up had a significant increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, LV systolic dysfunction detected by FSP showed a better prognosis. In this context, genetics, Holter ECG and LV-GLS demonstrated their functional role for disease and event prediction.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
European J of Heart Fail - 2025 - Del Mestre - Prediction and prognostic role of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in-1.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Documento in Versione Editoriale
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
605.84 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
605.84 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


