Abstract
Background
Recent reports indicate that specific left ventricular (LV) geometric patterns predict recurrent ventricular arrhythmias in patients with implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, this relationship has not been evaluated among patients at risk of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) in the general population.
Methods and Results
Adult SCA cases from the Oregon Sudden Unexpected Death Study were compared with geographic controls with no prior history of SCA. Archived echocardiograms performed closest and prior to the SCA event were reviewed. LV geometry was defined as normal (normal LV mass index [LVMI] and relative wall thickness [RWT]), concentric remodeling (normal LVMI and increased RWT), concentric hypertrophy (increased LVMI and RWT), or eccentric hypertrophy (increased LVMI and normal RWT). Analysis was restricted to those with LVEF ≤40%. A total of 246 subjects were included in the analysis. SCA cases (n=172, 68.6±13.3 years, 78% male), compared to controls (n=74, 66.8±12.1 years, 73% male), had lower LVEF (29.4±7.9% vs 30.8±6.3%, P=0.021). Fewer cases presented with normal LV geometry (30.2% vs 43.2%, P=0.048) and more with eccentric hypertrophy (40.7% vs 25.7%, P=0.025). In a multivariate model, eccentric hypertrophy was independently predictive of SCA (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.08–4.29, P=0.03).
Conclusions
Eccentric LV hypertrophy was independently associated with increased risk of SCA in subjects with EF ≤40%. These findings, now consistent between device‐implanted and non‐implanted populations, indicate the potential of improving SCA risk stratification from the same noninvasive echocardiogram at no additional cost.
Keywords: eccentric hypertrophy, left ventricular geometry, sudden cardiac arrest
Subject Categories: Sudden Cardiac Death, Heart Failure, Hypertrophy, Remodeling, Electrocardiology (ECG)
Introduction
The annual incidence of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) in the United States is estimated to be over 300 000, with low survival in the range of 5% to 7%.1, 2 The implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) has been shown to reduce mortality rates from SCA in large randomized clinical trials.3, 4 Based on the current guidelines, the decision for primary prevention ICD placement is largely reliant on measurement of the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).5 However, there is increasing evidence that LVEF may be inadequate as the sole SCA risk stratifier, and only a minority of patients meeting criteria for ICD implantation receive lifesaving therapies from the device.6 The process of clinical risk stratification clearly requires further improvement.7, 8 Furthermore, a recent analysis from the Oregon Sudden Unexpected Death Study (Oregon SUDS) found that only a small percentage of those who do meet these criteria receive ICD implantation prior to the SCA event.9 This emphasizes the need for additional parameters to improve SCA risk stratification, including those who already meet criteria based on LVEF, in the general population.
Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and increased left ventricular (LV) mass are known to be associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease, death from cardiovascular disease, all‐cause mortality, supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias, and SCA.10, 11, 12, 13 LV mass index (LVMI) along with relative wall thickness (ratio of wall thickness to LV diameter) (RWT) have been employed for classification of 4 LV geometric patterns: normal geometry (normal LVMI and normal RWT), concentric remodeling (normal LVMI and increased RWT), eccentric hypertrophy (increased LVMI and normal RWT), and concentric hypertrophy (increased LVMI and increased RWT).14 The 4 LV geometry patterns have been shown to confer unique risks for cardiovascular morbidity and all‐cause mortality, with concentric hypertrophy typically conferring the highest risk, followed by eccentric hypertrophy, and then concentric remodeling.15, 16, 17 A recent study in subjects with ICDs and reduced LVEF found the magnitude of eccentric geometry, as determined by low versus high RWT, to be a significant predictor of recurrent ventricular arrhythmias.18 However, to the best of our knowledge, the risk associated with the pattern of LV geometry, specifically eccentric hypertrophy, has not yet been evaluated in subjects with reduced LV function at risk of SCA in the general population. We therefore sought to determine whether different LV geometry patterns are associated with higher SCA risk in patients with reduced LVEF.
Methods
Study Population
SCA cases occurring between February 1, 2002 and January 31, 2015 as well as geographic controls were obtained from subjects in the Oregon Sudden Unexpected Death Study (Oregon SUDS), a prospective study of out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest in Portland, Oregon (population ~1 million) ongoing since 2002. Methods for this study have been published in detail previously.19 Briefly, cases of out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest were identified through multiple sources including fire department, ambulance services, local hospital emergency rooms, and the county medical examiner's office. SCA was defined as a sudden, unexpected, pulseless condition of likely cardiac etiology if witnessed, and within 24 hours of last having been seen in usual state of health if unwitnessed. Noncardiac causes of death such as trauma, drug overdose, pulmonary embolism, cerebrovascular accident, or chronic terminal illness were excluded. Both survivors and nonsurvivors of the cardiac arrest event were included in the cases. A 3‐physician review of available medical records/autopsy reports was performed for adjudication of SCA. Unmatched geographic controls were used as the comparison group. Because previous community‐based studies have shown ≥80% of SCA patients to have associated coronary artery disease (CAD),20 around 80% of controls included in our analysis had CAD. These subjects were required to have had no history of prior ventricular arrhythmia or cardiac arrest. CAD was defined as having ≥50% stenosis of a major coronary artery, history of myocardial infarction, or history of coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention. Hypertension was defined as clinical history of hypertension documented in the medical records. Diabetes mellitus was defined as documented history of diabetes mellitus in the medical records or by the use of insulin or other hypoglycemic agent. Control subjects were ascertained from multiple sources: chest pain patients attended by emergency medical services, outpatient clinics, patients undergoing angiography, and patients from a large health maintenance organization in the Portland metro area.
All subjects aged ≥18 years with echocardiograms available and LVEF ≤40% were included in the analysis. Medical records were reviewed for demographic data and clinical history (age, sex, race, history of diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease [CKD], obesity [body mass index ≥30 kg/m2], and hypertension). All archived reports for echocardiograms performed closest and prior to the SCA event were used for analysis. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards of Cedars‐Sinai Medical Center, Oregon Health and Science University, and all participating hospitals and health systems. All survivors of sudden cardiac arrest provided informed consent; for nonsurvivors this requirement was waived.
Echocardiogram Analysis
LVEF, LV end‐diastolic diameter (LVEDD), interventricular septal thickness at end diastole (IVSd), LV posterior wall thickness at end diastole (PWd), and presence of valvular disease were obtained from echocardiograms. From these values, LV mass was calculated via the linear formula as recommended by the American Society of Echocardiography, 0.8 × {1.04([LVEDD+PWd+IVSd]3−[LVEDD]3)}+0.6 g,14 and LVMI was calculated by dividing the LV mass by the body surface area (g/m2). RWT was calculated by multiplying 2 times PWd divided by LVEDD. A cutoff of 134 g/m2 for males and 110 g/m2 for females was used to define an increased LVMI.21 RWT was defined as increased if ≥0.45.15 Classification of LV geometry, based on LVMI and RWT, was into normal (normal LVMI and normal RWT), concentric remodeling (normal LVMI and increased RWT), concentric hypertrophy (increased LVMI and RWT), and eccentric hypertrophy (increased LVMI and normal RWT).14 Subjects with severe aortic stenosis, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, and LVEF >40% were excluded.
Statistical Analysis
Cases and controls were compared using independent‐samples t‐tests and chi‐squared tests for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. The different LV geometry types in SCA cases were compared using ANOVA and chi‐squared test for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Equality of variances was tested using the Levene test, and for those parameters that did not have equal variances the nonparametric Kruskal‐Wallis test was used instead of ANOVA. A 2‐tailed P value of ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the odds ratio (OR) for independent association between LV geometry and SCA, using normal LV geometry as the reference. Independent models were developed that adjusted for demographic parameters. To determine the independent effect of RWT on SCA risk, we performed a similar analysis for RWT as a continuous variable and a categorical variable using the lowest quartile as the cutoff (<0.31). All analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 21.0 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY).
Results
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics
Echocardiographic data on LV geometry were available from 535 cases and 414 controls. After exclusion of subjects with preserved LVEF >40%, a total of 246 subjects (172 cases, 74 controls) were included in the analysis (Table 1). Cases were more likely than controls to have hypertension (77.9% versus 64.9%, P=0.03) and CKD (44.2% versus 20.3%, P<0.001). There were no significant differences in other demographic and medical history parameters evaluated.
Table 1.
Baseline Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of SCA Cases Versus Controls With EF ≤40%
| Total (n=246) | Case (n=172) | Control (n=74) | P Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, y | 68.6±13.3 | 66.8±12.1 | 0.32 |
| Male sex | 134 (77.9%) | 54 (73.0%) | 0.40 |
| Racea | 0.34 | ||
| White | 141 (82.5%) | 62 (87.3%) | |
| Black | 23 (13.5%) | 5 (7.0%) | |
| Other | 7 (4.1%) | 4 (5.6%) | |
| Hypertension | 134 (77.9%) | 48 (64.9%) | 0.03 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 84 (48.8%) | 32 (46.0%) | 0.68 |
| CKD | 76 (44.2%) | 15 (20.3%) | <0.001 |
| Obesity (BMI ≥30 kg/m2) | 67 (39.0%) | 32 (43.2%) | 0.53 |
CKD indicates chronic kidney disease; EF, ejection fraction; SCA, sudden cardiac arrest.
Data are presented as mean±SD or n (%). BMI indicates body mass index.
Race data available for 171 cases and 71 controls.
Characteristics of SCA Cases With Different LV Geometry
We compared several parameters across LV geometry types in SCA cases (Table 2). History of prior myocardial infarction was highest in concentric hypertrophy. Otherwise, there were no significant differences in demographics or medical history. LVMI and LVEDD were highest and LVEF lowest in eccentric hypertrophy. IVSd and PWd were highest in concentric hypertrophy. RWT was lowest in normal and eccentric hypertrophy. A similar comparison was made in the unmatched geographic controls (Table S1). Findings were similar, except hypertension prevalence was highest in concentric hypertrophy, and there were no significant differences in history of myocardial infarction or LVEF between groups.
Table 2.
Characteristics by LV Geometry in SCA Cases With EF ≤40%
| Total (n=172) | Normal (n=52) | Concentric Remodeling (n=24) | Concentric Hypertrophy (n=26) | Eccentric Hypertrophy (n=70) | P Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, y | 65.0±12.1 | 72.0±10.6 | 72.5±14.0 | 68.6±14.2 | 0.056 |
| Male sex | 42 (80.8%) | 19 (79.2%) | 18 (69.2%) | 55 (78.6%) | 0.700 |
| Racea | 0.201 | ||||
| White | 42 (80.8%) | 23 (100%) | 21 (80.8%) | 55 (78.6%) | |
| Black | 8 (15.4%) | 0 (0%) | 8 (15.4%) | 10 (14.3%) | |
| Other | 2 (3.9%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (7.1%) | |
| CAD | 40 (76.9%) | 19 (79.2%) | 23 (88.5%) | 52 (74.3%) | 0.519 |
| Hypertension | 40 (76.9%) | 19 (79.2%) | 19 (73.1%) | 56 (80.0%) | 0.901 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 24 (46.2%) | 15 (62.5%) | 15 (57.7%) | 30 (42.9%) | 0.289 |
| CKD | 17 (32.7%) | 11 (45.8%) | 15 (57.7%) | 33 (47.1%) | 0.173 |
| Obesity (BMI ≥30 kg/m2) | 20 (38.5%) | 11 (45.8%) | 14 (53.9%) | 22 (31.4%) | 0.206 |
| History of MI | 35 (67.3%) | 15 (62.5%) | 22 (84.6%) | 38 (54.3%) | 0.048 |
| Echocardiographic parameters | |||||
| LV mass index, g/m2 | 104.0±16.6 | 107.7±21.2 | 167.2±36.7 | 173.7±32.5 | <0.001 |
| LVEDD, mm | 58.2±7.1 | 48.9±6.7 | 55.7±5.7 | 67.1±7.5 | <0.001 |
| LVEF, % | 29.9±7.7 | 32.4±6.4 | 31.5±6.4 | 27.1±8.6 | 0.010 |
| IVSd, mm | 9.4±1.6 | 11.8±1.7 | 13.8±2.8 | 11.7±2.6 | <0.001 |
| PWd, mm | 9.2±1.4 | 11.6±1.1 | 13.7±1.4 | 10.7±1.6 | <0.001 |
| RWT | 0.32±0.06 | 0.48±0.07 | 0.50±0.08 | 0.32±0.06 | <0.001 |
Data are presented as mean±SD or n (%). BMI indicates body mass index; CAD, coronary artery disease; CKD, chronic kidney disease; EF, ejection fraction; IVSd, interventricular septum in diastole; LV, left ventricular; LVEDD, left ventricular end‐diastolic diameter; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; LVH, left ventricular hypertrophy; MI, myocardial infarction; PWd, posterior wall in diastole; RWT, relative wall thickness (calculated as: [2×PWd]/LVEDD); SCA, sudden cardiac arrest.
Race data available for 52 normal, 23 concentric remodeling, 26 concentric hypertrophy, 70 eccentric hypertrophy.
Echocardiographic Characteristics of Cases and Controls
With regard to echocardiographic parameters (Table 3), cases were significantly more likely than controls to have a higher mean LVMI (142.4±43.3 vs 123.2±38.2 g/m2, P<0.001), increased LVMI (>134 g/m2 for males, >110 g/m2 for females) (55.8% vs 39.2%, P=0.017), higher mean LVEDD (60.1±9.5 vs 56.7±9.0 mm, P=0.003), and lower mean LVEF (29.4±7.9% vs 30.8±6.3%, P=0.021). There were no significant differences in IVSd, PWd, or RWT between groups.
Table 3.
Comparison of Echocardiographic Characteristics of SCA Cases and Controls With EF ≤40%
| Case (n=172) | Control (n=74) | P Value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| LV mass index, g/m2 | 142.4±43.3 | 123.2±38.2 | <0.001 |
| Increased LV mass index | 96 (55.8%) | 29 (39.2%) | 0.017 |
| LVEDD, mm | 60.1±9.5 | 56.7±9.0 | 0.003 |
| LVEF, % | 29.4±7.9 | 30.8±6.3 | 0.021 |
| IVSd, mm | 11.3±2.6 | 10.9±2.7 | 0.143 |
| PWd, mm | 10.8±2.1 | 10.3±2.3 | 0.061 |
| RWT | 0.37±0.10 | 0.37±0.10 | 0.883 |
| RWT ≥0.45 | 50 (29.1%) | 23 (31.1%) | 0.752 |
| LV geometry | |||
| Normal | 52 (30.2%) | 32 (43.2%) | 0.048 |
| Concentric remodeling | 24 (14.0%) | 13 (17.6%) | 0.467 |
| Concentric hypertrophy | 26 (15.1%) | 10 (13.5%) | 0.744 |
| Eccentric hypertrophy | 70 (40.7%) | 19 (25.7%) | 0.025 |
Data are presented as mean±SD or n (%). EF indicates ejection fraction; IVSd, interventricular septum in diastole; LV, left ventricular; LVEDD, left ventricular end‐diastolic diameter; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; LVH, left ventricular hypertrophy; PWd, posterior wall in diastole; RWT, relative wall thickness; SCA, sudden cardiac arrest.
Risk of SCA Associated With Abnormal LV Geometry
The LV geometry pattern differed significantly in SCA cases compared to controls. Normal LV geometry was significantly less prevalent (30.2% vs 43.2%, P=0.048), and eccentric hypertrophy was more prevalent (40.7% vs 25.7%, P=0.025) (Figure), in cases compared to controls. There were no significant differences in occurrence of concentric remodeling and concentric hypertrophy between groups.
Figure 1.
Distribution of LV geometry patterns in sudden cardiac arrest case versus control subjects. Cases were significantly more likely to have eccentric LV hypertrophy. P values were obtained using chi‐squared test for each LV geometry type, with a value of ≤0.05 indicating a statistically significant difference.
In multivariable analysis adjusting for age, sex, and race (Table 4), eccentric hypertrophy was independently predictive of SCA, increasing the odds by over 2‐fold compared to normal LV geometry (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.08‐4.29, P=0.03). Concentric remodeling and concentric hypertrophy were not statistically significant predictors of SCA. When RWT was examined as an independent predictor of SCA, both as a continuous variable and employing a cutoff of <0.31 (lowest quartile in our sample), RWT was not associated with SCA.
Table 4.
Odds Ratios of SCA Associated With Eccentric Hypertrophy
| OR | 95% CI | P Value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unadjusted (n=246) | |||
| Normal | 1 | 1 | — |
| Concentric remodeling | 1.14 | 0.51 to 2.54 | 0.756 |
| Concentric hypertrophy | 1.60 | 0.68 to 3.75 | 0.280 |
| Eccentric hypertrophy | 2.27 | 1.16 to 4.44 | 0.017 |
| Model 1 (n=246) | |||
| Normal | 1 | 1 | — |
| Concentric remodeling | 1.06 | 0.47 to 2.39 | 0.890 |
| Concentric hypertrophy | 1.62 | 0.68 to 3.84 | 0.278 |
| Eccentric hypertrophy | 2.26 | 1.15 to 4.45 | 0.018 |
| Model 2 (n=242) | |||
| Normal | 1 | 1 | — |
| Concentric remodeling | 0.98 | 0.43 to 2.25 | 0.958 |
| Concentric hypertrophy | 1.56 | 0.63 to 3.86 | 0.337 |
| Eccentric hypertrophy | 2.15 | 1.08 to 4.29 | 0.030 |
Model 1: adjusted for age and sex. Model 2: adjusted for age, sex, and race. CI indicates confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; SCA, sudden cardiac arrest.
Discussion
To the best of our knowledge, there are no existing community‐based data on the risk of SCA associated with different LV geometry patterns in patients with reduced LVEF. This is likely to be the first study to report that eccentric hypertrophy is predictive of SCA in subjects with reduced LV function in the general population. The other LV geometry patterns, concentric remodeling and concentric hypertrophy, were not found to be significantly associated with SCA. These findings indicate that LV eccentric hypertrophy confers increased risk of SCA independent of reduced LVEF, and both can be measured from the same noninvasive echocardiogram, potentially providing enhanced clinical utility at no additional cost. Following on the recently published similar findings in a primary prevention device population, the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT‐CRT),18 these data from nonimplanted patients who suffered SCA indicate the significant potential of this marker to improve clinical risk stratification.
Abnormal LV geometry has also been studied in the context of overall cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and shown to be associated with worse prognosis and outcomes. Analysis from 3216 subjects in the Framingham Heart Study found that event rates of cardiovascular disease or death were highest in concentric hypertrophy, followed by eccentric hypertrophy, then concentric remodeling, and normal geometry.16 Another analysis from 5098 subjects in the Multi‐Ethnic‐Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) showed LV geometry based on cardiac MRI was a better predictor of stroke and coronary heart disease compared to LV mass alone.22 Similar associations were reported in several other disease populations, such as those with CAD,17 post–myocardial infarction,23 atrial fibrillation,24 hypertension,15, 25, 26, 27, 28 CKD,27 preserved LV function,28, 29, 30 and advanced age.31 However, most recently an analysis among patients with LVEF ≤30% enrolled in the MADIT‐CRT study found the magnitude of eccentric remodeling to be predictive of risk of recurrent ventricular arrhythmias.18 Now, our findings provide additional insight into the relationship between LV geometry and SCA among subjects with reduced LV function in the general population.
Among the SCA cases in our study, 30% had normal geometry, and 41% had eccentric hypertrophy on echocardiograms prior to the event. In contrast, controls had significantly more subjects with normal geometry (43%) and fewer with eccentric hypertrophy (26%). There were no significant differences in concentric remodeling and hypertrophy prevalence compared between groups. On comparison between LV geometry patterns, the eccentric hypertrophy subgroup was observed to have the lowest value of LVEF. Eccentric hypertrophy was found to increase risk of SCA by over 2‐fold, even when adjusted for demographic parameters. These findings suggest that abnormal LV geometry, specifically eccentric hypertrophy, increases risk for SCA, which may aid in further SCA risk stratification in subjects with reduced LV function in the general population.
A potential explanation for eccentric hypertrophy increasing risk for SCA compared to the other LV geometry patterns may be related to the increased arrhythmogenic risk associated specifically with eccentric hypertrophy.32 This has been supported in the literature by a recent study from Draper et al that looked at ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation (VT/VF) occurrence in subjects with reduced LV function in the general population.33 They found among the 127 patients studied, occurrence of ventricular arrhythmias was highest in those with eccentric hypertrophy, compared to concentric remodeling/hypertrophy and normal geometry. The MADIT‐CRT study found decreased RWT in patients with eccentric hypertrophy to be associated with higher risk of ventricular arrhythmias compared to those with higher RWT.18 Enlargement in LV size could potentially be the driving force behind increased arrhythmogenesis in eccentric hypertrophy as well as decreased RWT. LV diameter has been shown to be independently predictive of SCA and to have an additive effect with LVEF on predicting SCA risk.34, 35 Two studies, 1 in patients post–myocardial infarction36 and the other in patients with severe LV dysfunction,37 found that increased LV size was predictive of ventricular arrhythmias and frequent premature ventricular contractions (PVC). This association was further supported in a study that found reduction of LV end‐systolic size in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy reduced occurrence of PVCs and VT/VF events.38 With eccentric hypertrophy commonly occurring secondary to an increase in preload volume and resulting in enlargement of the LV, the increased ventricular arrhythmic risk associated with this LV geometric pattern is a potential explanation linking the association we found between eccentric hypertrophy and SCA.
It is possible that adverse myocardial interstitial remodeling could have a role in increasing arrhythmic risk in eccentric hypertrophy. Increased interstitial collagen has been found in diseased hearts, such as in noninfarcted tissue in myocardial infarction or hypertensive hypertrophy.39 Presence of fibrosis can create conditions that promote reentry and ventricular arrhythmogenesis. This has been supported in a study looking at patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy that found presence of fibrosis on cardiac magnetic resonance increases risk of SCA, ICD shocks, nonfatal VF, and sustained VT.40 However, concentric hypertrophy and eccentric hypertrophy have different collagen remodeling patterns.41 These different remodeling patterns may carry unique arrhythmic risks. Abnormal myocardial fibrosis, common to all forms of LVH, is the leading substrate for ventricular arrhythmogenesis. However, due to ventricular wall thinning and dilatation, increased wall stress may further increase arrhythmic risk in patients with eccentric hypertrophy, even at a relatively late stage of LV remodeling. Further studies would be needed to explore this hypothesis.
Limitations
Given the relatively infrequent occurrence of SCA compared to the size of the general population, a case‐control design was employed that has some inherent limitations. Analysis was restricted to subjects with appropriate echocardiograms available, and since SCA may occur as the first presentation or evidence for CAD, sampling of subjects may be biased. Furthermore, echocardiograms used in this study were obtained based on routine clinical practice, and thus, reproducibility of the measurements could not be assessed. Also, as expected, the control subjects had lower rates of echocardiography as well as a lower proportion of severe LV systolic dysfunction. Multivariable models were developed; however, for any observational study, unknown confounders cannot be excluded with certainty. The strength of this study is the community‐based prospective ascertainment of SCA cases for sampling of this adverse event in the general population.
Conclusion
Eccentric hypertrophy is independently predictive of SCA in subjects with EF ≤40% in the general population. Given the well‐recognized limitations of using LVEF as the sole risk stratifier and the recent similar observations made from the MADIT‐CRT population, our findings suggest that evaluation of LV geometry may supplement and enhance LVEF‐based SCA risk stratification.
Sources of Funding
This was work was funded in part by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute grants R01HL122492 and R01HL126938 to Dr Chugh. Dr Chugh holds the Pauline and Harold Price Chair in Cardiac Electrophysiology at Cedars‐Sinai, Los Angeles. Dr Aro is funded by grants from the Finnish Cultural Foundation and the Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research.
Disclosures
None.
Supporting information
Table S1. Characteristics by LV Geometry in Controls With EF ≤40%
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the significant contribution of American Medical Response, Portland/Gresham Fire Departments, and the Oregon State Medical Examiner's office.
(J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5:e003715 doi: 10.1161/JAHA.116.003715)
This article was handled independently by N. A. Mark Estes III, MD, as a guest editor. The editors had no role in the evaluation of the manuscript or in the decision about its acceptance.
References
- 1. Mozaffarian D, Benjamin EJ, Go AS, Arnett DK, Blaha MJ, Cushman M, de Ferranti S, Després JP, Fullerton HJ, Howard VJ, Huffman MD, Judd SE, Kissela BM, Lackland DT, Lichtman JH, Lisabeth LD, Liu S, Mackey RH, Matchar DB, McGuire DK, Mohler ER III, Moy CS, Muntner P, Mussolino ME, Nasir K, Neumar RW, Nichol G, Palaniappan L, Pandey DK, Reeves MJ, Rodriguez CJ, Sorlie PD, Stein J, Towfighi A, Turan TN, Virani SS, Willey JZ, Woo D, Yeh RW, Turner MB; American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee . Heart disease and stroke statistics–2015 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2015;131:e29–e322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Nichol G, Thomas E, Callaway CW, Hedges J, Powell JL, Aufderheide TP, Rea T, Lowe R, Brown T, Dreyer J, Davis D, Idris A, Stiell I; Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Investigators . Regional variation in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest incidence and outcome. JAMA. 2008;300:1423–1431. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Bardy GH, Lee KL, Mark DB, Poole JE, Packer DL, Boineau R, Domanski M, Troutman C, Anderson J, Johnson G, McNulty SE, Clapp‐Channing N, Davidson‐Ray LD, Fraulo ES, Fishbein DP, Luceri RM, Ip JH; Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD‐HeFT) Investigators . Amiodarone or an implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator for congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:225–237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Moss AJ, Zareba W, Hall WJ, Klein H, Wilber DJ, Cannom DS, Daubert JP, Higgins SL, Brown MW, Andrews ML; Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II Investigators . Prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in patients with myocardial infarction and reduced ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:877–883. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Epstein AE, DiMarco JP, Ellenbogen KA, Estes NA III, Freedman RA, Gettes LS, Gillinov AM, Gregoratos G, Hammill SC, Hayes DL, Hlatky MA, Newby LK, Page RL, Schoenfeld MH, Silka MJ, Stevenson LW, Sweeney MO, Smith SC Jr, Jacobs AK, Adams CD, Anderson JL, Buller CE, Creager MA, Ettinger SM, Faxon DP, Halperin JL, Hiratzka LF, Hunt SA, Krumholz HM, Kushner FG, Lytle BW, Nishimura RA, Ornato JP, Page RL, Riegel B, Tarkington LG, Yancy CW; American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 Guideline Update for Implantation of Cardiac Pacemakers and Antiarrhythmia Devices); American Association for Thoracic Surgery; Society of Thoracic Surgeons . ACC/AHA/HRS 2008 guidelines for device‐based therapy of cardiac rhythm abnormalities: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 Guideline Update for Implantation of Cardiac Pacemakers and Antiarrhythmia Devices): developed in collaboration with the American Association for Thoracic Surgery and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation. 2008;117:e350–e408. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Sabbag A, Suleiman M, Laish‐Farkash A, Samania N, Kazatsker M, Goldenberg I, Glikson M, Beinart R; Israeli Working Group of Pacing and Electrophysiology . Contemporary rates of appropriate shock therapy in patients who receive implantable device therapy in a real‐world setting: from the Israeli ICD Registry. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:2426–2433. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Stecker EC, Chugh SS. Prediction of sudden cardiac death: next steps in pursuit of effective methodology. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2011;31:101–107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Buxton AE, Lee KL, Hafley GE, Pires LA, Fisher JD, Gold MR, Josephson ME, Lehmann MH, Prystowsky EN; MUSTT Investigators . Limitations of ejection fraction for prediction of sudden death risk in patients with coronary artery disease: lessons from the MUSTT study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:1150–1157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Narayanan K, Reinier K, Uy‐Evanado A, Teodorescu C, Chugh H, Marijon E, Gunson K, Jui J, Chugh SS. Frequency and determinants of implantable cardioverter defibrillator deployment among primary prevention candidates with subsequent sudden cardiac arrest in the community. Circulation. 2013;128:1733–1738. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Levy D, Garrison RJ, Savage DD, Kannel WB, Castelli WP. Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass in the Framingham Heart Study. N Engl J Med. 1990;322:1561–1566. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Chatterjee S, Bavishi C, Sardar P, Agarwal V, Krishnamoorthy P, Grodzicki T, Messerli FH. Meta‐analysis of left ventricular hypertrophy and sustained arrhythmias. Am J Cardiol. 2014;114:1049–1052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Haider AW, Larson MG, Benjamin EJ, Levy D. Increased left ventricular mass and hypertrophy are associated with increased risk for sudden death. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:1454–1459. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Reinier K, Dervan C, Singh T, Uy‐Evanado A, Lai S, Gunson K, Jui J, Chugh SS. Increased left ventricular mass and decreased left ventricular systolic function have independent pathways to ventricular arrhythmogenesis in coronary artery disease. Heart Rhythm. 2011;8:1177–1182. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Lang RM, Badano LP, Mor‐Avi V, Afilalo J, Armstrong A, Ernande L, Flachskampf FA, Foster E, Goldstein SA, Kuznetsova T, Lancellotti P, Muraru D, Picard MH, Rietzschel ER, Rudski L, Spencer KT, Tsang W, Voigt JU. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;16:233–270. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Koren MJ, Devereux RB, Casale PN, Savage DD, Laragh JH. Relation of left ventricular mass and geometry to morbidity and mortality in uncomplicated essential hypertension. Ann Intern Med. 1991;114:345–352. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Krumholz HM, Larson M, Levy D. Prognosis of left ventricular geometric patterns in the Framingham Heart Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;25:879–884. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Ghali JK, Liao Y, Cooper RS. Influence of left ventricular geometric patterns on prognosis in patients with or without coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;31:1635–1640. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Biton Y, Goldenberg I, Kutyifa V, Baman JR, Solomon S, Moss AJ, Szepietowska B, McNitt S, Polonsky B, Zareba W, Barsheshet A. Relative wall thickness and the risk for ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:303–312. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Chugh SS, Jui J, Gunson K, Stecker EC, John BT, Thompson B, Ilias N, Vickers C, Dogra V, Daya M, Kron J, Zheng ZJ, Mensah G, McAnulty J. Current burden of sudden cardiac death: multiple source surveillance versus retrospective death certificate‐based review in a large U.S. community. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44:1268–1275. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Adabag AS, Peterson G, Apple FS, Titus J, King R, Luepker RV. Etiology of sudden death in the community: results of anatomical, metabolic, and genetic evaluation. Am Heart J. 2010;159:33–39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Devereux RB, Lutas EM, Casale PN, Kligfield P, Eisenberg RR, Hammond IW, Miller DH, Reis G, Alderman MH, Laragh JH. Standardization of M‐mode echocardiographic left ventricular anatomic measurements. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984;4:1222–1230. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Bluemke DA, Kronmal RA, Lima JA, Liu K, Olson J, Burke GL, Folsom AR. The relationship of left ventricular mass and geometry to incident cardiovascular events: the MESA (Multi‐Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:2148–2155. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Verma A, Meris A, Skali H, Ghali JK, Arnold JM, Bourgoun M, Velazquez EJ, McMurray JJ, Kober L, Pfeffer MA, Califf RM, Solomon SD. Prognostic implications of left ventricular mass and geometry following myocardial infarction: the VALIANT (VALsartan In Acute myocardial iNfarcTion) Echocardiographic Study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2008;1:582–591. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Apostolakis S, Sullivan RM, Olshansky B, Lip GY. Left ventricular geometry and outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation: the AFFIRM Trial. Int J Cardiol. 2014;170:303–308. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Muiesan ML, Salvetti M, Monteduro C, Bonzi B, Paini A, Viola S, Poisa P, Rizzoni D, Castellano M, Agabiti‐Rosei E. Left ventricular concentric geometry during treatment adversely affects cardiovascular prognosis in hypertensive patients. Hypertension. 2004;43:731–738. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Verdecchia P, Schillaci G, Borgioni C, Ciucci A, Battistelli M, Bartoccini C, Santucci A, Santucci C, Reboldi G, Porcellati C. Adverse prognostic significance of concentric remodeling of the left ventricle in hypertensive patients with normal left ventricular mass. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;25:871–878. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Paoletti E, De Nicola L, Gabbai FB, Chiodini P, Ravera M, Pieracci L, Marre S, Cassottana P, Lucà S, Vettoretti S, Borrelli S, Conte G, Minutolo R. Associations of left ventricular hypertrophy and geometry with adverse outcomes in patients with CKD and hypertension. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2016;11:271–279. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Milani RV, Lavie CJ, Mehra MR, Ventura HO, Kurtz JD, Messerli FH. Left ventricular geometry and survival in patients with normal left ventricular ejection fraction. Am J Cardiol. 2006;97:959–963. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Lavie CJ, Milani RV, Ventura HO, Cardenas GA, Mehra MR, Messerli FH. Disparate effects of left ventricular geometry and obesity on mortality in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. Am J Cardiol. 2007;100:1460–1464. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Lavie CJ, Patel DA, Milani RV, Ventura HO, Shah S, Gilliland Y. Impact of echocardiographic left ventricular geometry on clinical prognosis. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2014;57:3–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Teh RO, Kerse NM, Robinson EM, Whalley GA, Connolly MJ, Doughty RN. Left ventricular geometry and all‐cause mortality in advanced age. Heart Lung Circ. 2015;24:32–39. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Dogra V, Oliver R, Lapidus J, Balaji S, Kron J, McAnulty J, Chugh SS. Apparent protective effect of increased left ventricular wall thickness in an ICD population. J Card Fail. 2003;9:412–415. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Draper TS Jr, Silver JS, Gaasch WH. Adverse structural remodeling of the left ventricle and ventricular arrhythmias in patients with depressed ejection fraction. J Card Fail. 2015;21:97–102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Narayanan K, Reinier K, Teodorescu C, Uy‐Evanado A, Aleong R, Chugh H, Nichols GA, Gunson K, London B, Jui J, Chugh SS. Left ventricular diameter and risk stratification for sudden cardiac death. J Am Heart Assoc. 2014;3:e001193 doi: 10.1161/JAHA.114.001193. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Aleong RG, Mulvahill MJ, Halder I, Carlson NE, Singh M, Bloom HL, Dudley SC, Ellinor PT, Shalaby A, Weiss R, Gutmann R, Sauer WH, Narayanan K, Chugh SS, Saba S, London B. Left ventricular dilatation increases the risk of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with reduced systolic function. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4:e001566 doi: 10.1161/JAHA.114.001566. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. St John Sutton M, Lee D, Rouleau JL, Goldman S, Plappert T, Braunwald E, Pfeffer MA. Left ventricular remodeling and ventricular arrhythmias after myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2003;107:2577–2582. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Koilpillai C, Quiñones MA, Greenberg B, Limacher MC, Shindler D, Pratt CM, Benedict CR, Kopelen H, Shelton B. Relation of ventricular size and function to heart failure status and ventricular dysrhythmia in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction. Am J Cardiol. 1996;77:606–611. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Markowitz SM, Lewen JM, Wiggenhorn CJ, Abraham WT, Stein KM, Iwai S, Lerman BB. Relationship of reverse anatomical remodeling and ventricular arrhythmias after cardiac resynchronization. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2009;20:293–298. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Volders PG, Willems IE, Cleutjens JP, Arends JW, Havenith MG, Daemen MJ. Interstitial collagen is increased in the non‐infarcted human myocardium after myocardial infarction. J Mol Cell Cardiol. 1993;25:1317–1323. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Gulati A, Jabbour A, Ismail TF, Guha K, Khwaja J, Raza S, Morarji K, Brown TD, Ismail NA, Dweck MR, Di Pietro E, Roughton M, Wage R, Daryani Y, O'Hanlon R, Sheppard MN, Alpendurada F, Lyon AR, Cook SA, Cowie MR, Assomull RG, Pennell DJ, Prasad SK. Association of fibrosis with mortality and sudden cardiac death in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. JAMA. 2013;309:896–908. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Kehat I, Molkentin JD. Molecular pathways underlying cardiac remodeling during pathophysiological stimulation. Circulation. 2010;122:2727–2735. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Table S1. Characteristics by LV Geometry in Controls With EF ≤40%