BACKGROUND: Patients with Chagas disease and segmental wall motion abnormality (SWMA) have worse prognosis independent of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is currently the best method to detect SWMA and to assess fibrosis. OBJECTIVE: To quantify fibrosis by using late gadolinium enhancement CMR in patients with Chagas disease and preserved or minimally impaired ventricular function (> 45%), and to detect patterns of dependence between fibrosis, SWMA and LVEF in the presence of ventricular arrhythmia. METHODS: Electrocardiogram, treadmill exercise test, Holter and CMR were carried out in 61 patients, who were divided into three groups as follows: (1) normal electrocardiogram and CMR without SWMA; (2) abnormal electrocardiogram and CMR without SWMA; (3) CMR with SWMA independently of electrocardiogram. RESULTS: The number of patients with ventricular arrhythmia in relation to the total of patients, the percentage of fibrosis, and the LVEF were, respectively: Group 1, 4/26, 0.74% and 74.34%; Group 2, 4/16, 3.96% and 68.5%; and Group 3, 11/19, 14.07% and 55.59%. Ventricular arrhythmia was found in 31.1% of the patients. Those with and without ventricular arrhythmia had mean LVEF of 59.87% and 70.18%, respectively, and fibrosis percentage of 11.03% and 3.01%, respectively. Of the variables SWMA, groups, age, LVEF and fibrosis, only the latter was significant for the presence of ventricular arrhythmia, with a cutoff point of 11.78% for fibrosis mass (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Even in patients with Chagas disease and preserved or minimally impaired ventricular function, electrical instability can be present. Regarding the presence of ventricular arrhythmia, fibrosis is the most important variable, its amount being proportional to the complexity of the groups.
BACKGROUND:Patients with Chagas disease and segmental wall motion abnormality (SWMA) have worse prognosis independent of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is currently the best method to detect SWMA and to assess fibrosis. OBJECTIVE: To quantify fibrosis by using late gadolinium enhancement CMR in patients with Chagas disease and preserved or minimally impaired ventricular function (> 45%), and to detect patterns of dependence between fibrosis, SWMA and LVEF in the presence of ventricular arrhythmia. METHODS: Electrocardiogram, treadmill exercise test, Holter and CMR were carried out in 61 patients, who were divided into three groups as follows: (1) normal electrocardiogram and CMR without SWMA; (2) abnormal electrocardiogram and CMR without SWMA; (3) CMR with SWMA independently of electrocardiogram. RESULTS: The number of patients with ventricular arrhythmia in relation to the total of patients, the percentage of fibrosis, and the LVEF were, respectively: Group 1, 4/26, 0.74% and 74.34%; Group 2, 4/16, 3.96% and 68.5%; and Group 3, 11/19, 14.07% and 55.59%. Ventricular arrhythmia was found in 31.1% of the patients. Those with and without ventricular arrhythmia had mean LVEF of 59.87% and 70.18%, respectively, and fibrosis percentage of 11.03% and 3.01%, respectively. Of the variables SWMA, groups, age, LVEF and fibrosis, only the latter was significant for the presence of ventricular arrhythmia, with a cutoff point of 11.78% for fibrosis mass (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Even in patients with Chagas disease and preserved or minimally impaired ventricular function, electrical instability can be present. Regarding the presence of ventricular arrhythmia, fibrosis is the most important variable, its amount being proportional to the complexity of the groups.
Authors: C Mady; B M Ianni; E Arteaga; G S Montes; E G Caldini; G Andrade; M C Giorgi; P H Saldiva Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1999-08-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: O P Simonetti; R J Kim; D S Fieno; H B Hillenbrand; E Wu; J M Bundy; J P Finn; R M Judd Journal: Radiology Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Ander Regueiro; Ana García-Álvarez; Marta Sitges; José Tomás Ortiz-Pérez; Maria Teresa De Caralt; María Jesús Pinazo; Elizabeth Posada; Magda Heras; Joaquim Gascón; Ginés Sanz Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2011-09-09 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: R M Peshock; R Rokey; G M Malloy; P McNamee; L M Buja; R W Parkey; J T Willerson Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1989-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Frank Grothues; Gillian C Smith; James C C Moon; Nicholas G Bellenger; Peter Collins; Helmut U Klein; Dudley J Pennell Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2002-07-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Nabil Ghorayeb; Ricardo Stein; Daniel Jogaib Daher; Anderson Donelli da Silveira; Luiz Eduardo Fonteles Ritt; Daniel Fernando Pellegrino Dos Santos; Ana Paula Rennó Sierra; Artur Haddad Herdy; Claúdio Gil Soares de Araújo; Cléa Simone Sabino de Souza Colombo; Daniel Arkader Kopiler; Filipe Ferrari Ribeiro de Lacerda; José Kawazoe Lazzoli; Luciana Diniz Nagem Janot de Matos; Marcelo Bichels Leitão; Ricardo Contesini Francisco; Rodrigo Otávio Bougleux Alô; Sérgio Timerman; Tales de Carvalho; Thiago Ghorayeb Garcia Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Marcia Maria Noya-Rabelo; Carolina The Macedo; Ticiana Larocca; Admilson Machado; Thais Pacheco; Jorge Torreão; Bruno Solano de Freitas Souza; Milena B P Soares; Ricardo Ribeiro-Dos-Santos; Luis Claudio Lemos Correia Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2018-02-19 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Clarisse Lopes de Castro Lobo; Emilia Matos do Nascimento; Renato Abelha; Ana Maria Mach Queiroz; Philippe Connes; Gilberto Perez Cardoso; Samir K Ballas Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-09-03 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Andrei Fornanciari Antunes; Simão Gonçalves Maduro; Bruna Valessa Moutinho Pereira; Maria das Graças Vale Barbosa; Jorge Augusto de Oliveira Guerra; João Marcos Bemfica Barbosa Ferreira Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Kristyn A Hoffman; Corey Reynolds; Maria Elena Bottazzi; Peter Hotez; Kathryn Jones Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2019-11-13 Impact factor: 5.501