2 results
Prenatal diagnosis of isolated coronary artery fistulas: progression and outcome in five cases
- Gurleen K. Sharland, Laura Konta, Shakeel A. Qureshi
-
- Journal:
- Cardiology in the Young / Volume 26 / Issue 5 / June 2016
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 18 September 2015, pp. 915-920
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Objectives
The aim of this study was to describe the clinical characteristics, progression, treatment, and outcomes in isolated coronary artery fistula cases diagnosed prenatally.
MethodsWe carried out a retrospective review of babies diagnosed prenatally with coronary artery fistulas between January, 2000 and December, 2013; five fetuses were included. Echocardiographic features and measurements were noted during pregnancy and after birth. Treatment and outcome were noted.
ResultsGestational age at initial diagnosis was between 19 and 22 weeks; four coronary artery fistulas originated from the right and one from the left circumflex coronary artery. Drainage was into the right atrium in four cases and into the left ventricle in one case. There was cardiomegaly in two cases at the initial scan. The size of the fistulas increased during pregnancy in all except one. All prenatal diagnoses were confirmed postnatally. Among all, two patients developed congestive cardiac failure soon after birth and required transcatheter closure of the coronary artery fistula, 5 and 17 days after birth, respectively; three patients remained asymptomatic, and all of them showed progressive dilation of the feeding artery and had closure of the fistula at 20 months, 4 years, and 7 years of age, respectively. During the follow-up period, which ranged 2–14 years, all the patients were alive and well.
ConclusionsCoronary artery fistulas can be diagnosed accurately during fetal life. Some babies may develop congestive cardiac failure soon after birth requiring early treatment. Those treated conservatively should be kept under review as intervention may be required later.
Nomenclature and systems of classification for cardiomyopathy in children*
- Laura Konta, Rodney C. G. Franklin, Juan P. Kaski
-
- Journal:
- Cardiology in the Young / Volume 25 / Issue S2 / August 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 17 September 2015, pp. 31-42
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
There has been a progressive evolution in systems of classification for cardiomyopathy, driven by advances in imaging modalities, disease recognition, and genetics, following initial clinical descriptions in the 1960s. A pathophysiological classification emerged and was endorsed by World Health Organisation Task Forces in 1980 and 1995: dilated, hypertrophic, restrictive, and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathies; subdivided into idiopathic and disease-specific cardiomyopathies. Genetic advances have increasingly linked “idiopathic” phenotypes to specific mutations, although most linkages exhibit highly variable or little genotype–phenotype correlation, confounded by age-dependent changes and varying penetrance. The following two dominant classification systems are currently in use, with advocates in both continents. First, American Heart Association (2006): “A heterogeneous group of diseases of the myocardium associated with mechanical and/or electrical dysfunction that usually exhibit inappropriate ventricular hypertrophy or dilatation due to a variety of causes that frequently are genetic”. These are subdivided to those predominantly involving the heart – primary – due to genetic mutation, including ion channelopathies, acquired disease, or mixed; and those with systemic involvement in other organ systems – secondary. Second, European Society of Cardiology (2008): “A myocardial disorder in which heart muscle is structurally and functionally abnormal… sufficient to cause the observed myocardial abnormality”, with subdivision to familial and non-familial, excluding ion channelopathies, and split to specific disease subtypes and idiopathic. Further differences exist in the definitions for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; however, whichever high-level classification is used, the clinical reality remains phenotype driven. Clinical evaluation and diagnostic imaging dominate initial patient contact, revealing diagnostic red flags that determine further specific tests. Genetic testing is undertaken early. A recent attempt to harmonise these competing systems named the MOGE(S) system, based on descriptive logical nosology, currently remains unproven as a fully practical solution.