Genotype-Specific ECG-Based Risk Stratification Approaches in Patients With Long-QT Syndrome.

Background Congenital long-QT syndrome (LQTS) is a major cause of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in young individuals, calling for sophisticated risk assessment. Risk stratification, however, is challenging as the individual arrhythmic risk varies pronouncedly, even in individuals carrying the same variant. Materials and Methods In this study, we aimed to assess the association of different electrical parameters with the genotype and the symptoms in patients with LQTS. In addition to the heart-rate corrected QT interval (QTc), markers for regional electrical heterogeneity, such as QT dispersion (QTmax-QTmin in all ECG leads) and delta Tpeak/end (Tpeak/end V5 - Tpeak/end V2), were assessed in the 12-lead ECG at rest and during exercise testing. Results QTc at rest was significantly longer in symptomatic than asymptomatic patients with LQT2 (493.4 ms ± 46.5 ms vs. 419.5 ms ± 28.6 ms, p = 0.004), but surprisingly not associated with symptoms in LQT1. In contrast, post-exercise QTc (minute 4 of recovery) was significantly longer in symptomatic than asymptomatic patients with LQT1 (486.5 ms ± 7.0 ms vs. 463.3 ms ± 16.3 ms, p = 0.04), while no such difference was observed in patients with LQT2. Enhanced delta Tpeak/end and QT dispersion were only associated with symptoms in LQT1 (delta Tpeak/end 19.0 ms ± 18.1 ms vs. -4.0 ms ± 4.4 ms, p = 0.02; QT-dispersion: 54.3 ms ± 10.2 ms vs. 31.4 ms ± 10.4 ms, p = 0.01), but not in LQT2. Delta Tpeak/end was particularly discriminative after exercise, where all symptomatic patients with LQT1 had positive and all asymptomatic LQT1 patients had negative values (11.8 ± 7.9 ms vs. -7.5 ± 1.7 ms, p = 0.003). Conclusion Different electrical parameters can distinguish between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients in different genetic forms of LQTS. While the classical "QTc at rest" was only associated with symptoms in LQT2, post-exercise QTc helped distinguish between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with LQT1. Enhanced regional electrical heterogeneity was only associated with symptoms in LQT1, but not in LQT2. Our findings indicate that genotype-specific risk stratification approaches based on electrical parameters could help to optimize risk assessment in LQTS

Femoral nerve compression secondary to a ganglion cyst arising from a hip joint: a case report and review of the literature

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Femoral nerve compression due to a cystic lesion around the hip joint is rare and only a few cases have been described in the literature. Among these, true ganglion cysts are even more rare.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>We report the case of a 57-year-old woman with femoral nerve compression caused by a true ganglion cyst of the hip joint.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>A high index of suspicion is required to predict a non-palpable cystic lesion around the hip joint as it may mimic different disorders and should be kept in mind in the differential diagnosis of unusual groin pain, radicular pain and peripheral vascular disorders.</p

Genotype-Specific ECG-Based Risk Stratification Approaches in Patients With Long-QT Syndrome

BackgroundCongenital long-QT syndrome (LQTS) is a major cause of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in young individuals, calling for sophisticated risk assessment. Risk stratification, however, is challenging as the individual arrhythmic risk varies pronouncedly, even in individuals carrying the same variant.Materials and MethodsIn this study, we aimed to assess the association of different electrical parameters with the genotype and the symptoms in patients with LQTS. In addition to the heart-rate corrected QT interval (QTc), markers for regional electrical heterogeneity, such as QT dispersion (QTmax-QTmin in all ECG leads) and delta Tpeak/end (Tpeak/end V5 – Tpeak/end V2), were assessed in the 12-lead ECG at rest and during exercise testing.ResultsQTc at rest was significantly longer in symptomatic than asymptomatic patients with LQT2 (493.4 ms ± 46.5 ms vs. 419.5 ms ± 28.6 ms, p = 0.004), but surprisingly not associated with symptoms in LQT1. In contrast, post-exercise QTc (minute 4 of recovery) was significantly longer in symptomatic than asymptomatic patients with LQT1 (486.5 ms ± 7.0 ms vs. 463.3 ms ± 16.3 ms, p = 0.04), while no such difference was observed in patients with LQT2. Enhanced delta Tpeak/end and QT dispersion were only associated with symptoms in LQT1 (delta Tpeak/end 19.0 ms ± 18.1 ms vs. −4.0 ms ± 4.4 ms, p = 0.02; QT-dispersion: 54.3 ms ± 10.2 ms vs. 31.4 ms ± 10.4 ms, p = 0.01), but not in LQT2. Delta Tpeak/end was particularly discriminative after exercise, where all symptomatic patients with LQT1 had positive and all asymptomatic LQT1 patients had negative values (11.8 ± 7.9 ms vs. −7.5 ± 1.7 ms, p = 0.003).ConclusionDifferent electrical parameters can distinguish between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients in different genetic forms of LQTS. While the classical “QTc at rest” was only associated with symptoms in LQT2, post-exercise QTc helped distinguish between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with LQT1. Enhanced regional electrical heterogeneity was only associated with symptoms in LQT1, but not in LQT2. Our findings indicate that genotype-specific risk stratification approaches based on electrical parameters could help to optimize risk assessment in LQTS

Pseudoprogression, radionecrosis, inflammation or true tumor progression? challenges associated with glioblastoma response assessment in an evolving therapeutic landscape

The wide variety of treatment options that exist for glioblastoma, including surgery, ionizing radiation, anti-neoplastic chemotherapies, anti-angiogenic therapies, and active or passive immunotherapies, all may alter aspects of vascular permeability within the tumor and/or normal parenchyma. These alterations manifest as changes in the degree of contrast enhancement or T2-weighted signal hyperintensity on standard anatomic MRI scans, posing a potential challenge for accurate radiographic response assessment for identifying anti-tumor effects. The current review highlights the challenges that remain in differentiating true disease progression from changes due to radiation therapy, including pseudoprogression and radionecrosis, as well as immune or inflammatory changes that may occur as either an undesired result of cytotoxic therapy or as a desired consequence of immunotherapies