| Literature DB >> 34238011 |
Lee L Eckhardt1, Elizabeth S Kaufman2, Michael J Ackerman3,4,5, Peter F Aziz6, Elijah R Behr7,8, Marina Cerrone9, Mina K Chung10, Michael J Cutler11, Susan P Etheridge12, Andrew D Krahn13, Steven A Lubitz14, Marco V Perez15, Silvia G Priori8,16,17, Jason D Roberts18, Dan M Roden19, Eric Schulze-Bahr8,20, Peter J Schwartz8,21, Wataru Shimizu22, M Benjamin Shoemaker23, Raymond W Sy24,25, Jeffrey A Towbin26, Sami Viskin27, Arthur A M Wilde8,28,29, Wojciech Zareba30.
Abstract
While published guidelines are useful in the care of patients with long-QT syndrome, it can be difficult to decide how to apply the guidelines to individual patients, particularly those with intermediate risk. We explored the diversity of opinion among 24 clinicians with expertise in long-QT syndrome. Experts from various regions and institutions were presented with 4 challenging clinical scenarios and asked to provide commentary emphasizing why they would make their treatment recommendations. All 24 authors were asked to vote on case-specific questions so as to demonstrate the degree of consensus or divergence of opinion. Of 24 authors, 23 voted and 1 abstained. Details of voting results with commentary are presented. There was consensus on several key points, particularly on the importance of the diagnostic evaluation and of β-blocker use. There was diversity of opinion about the appropriate use of other therapeutic measures in intermediate-risk individuals. Significant gaps in knowledge were identified.Entities:
Keywords: defibrillators, implantable; genetic testing; knowledge; long-QT syndrome; politics
Mesh：
Substances：
Year: 2021 PMID： 34238011 PMCID： PMC8301722 DOI： 10.1161/CIRCEP.120.009726
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol ISSN： 1941-3084