Background— Mitral valve prolapse (MVP) may present with ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death (SCD) even in the absence of hemodynamic impairment. The structural basis of ventricular electric instability remains elusive. Methods and Results— The cardiac pathology registry of 650 young adults (≤40 years of age) with SCD was reviewed, and cases with MVP as the only cause of SCD were re-examined. Forty-three patients with MVP (26 females; age range, 19–40 years; median, 32 years) were identified (7% of all SCD, 13% of women). Among 12 cases with available ECG, 10 (83%) had inverted T waves on inferior leads, and all had right bundle-branch block ventricular arrhythmias. A bileaflet involvement was found in 70%. Left ventricular fibrosis was detected at histology at the level of papillary muscles in all patients, and inferobasal wall in 88%. Living patients with MVP with (n=30) and without (control subjects; n=14) complex ventricular arrhythmias underwent a study protocol including contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance. Patients with either right bundle-branch block type or polymorphic complex ventricular arrhythmias (22 females; age range, 28–43 years; median, 41 years), showed a bileaflet involvement in 70% of cases. Left ventricular late enhancement was identified by contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance in 93% of patients versus 14% of control subjects ( P <0.001), with a regional distribution overlapping the histopathology findings in SCD cases. Conclusions— MVP is an underestimated cause of arrhythmic SCD, mostly in young adult women. Fibrosis of the papillary muscles and inferobasal left ventricular wall, suggesting a myocardial stretch by the prolapsing leaflet, is the structural hallmark and correlates with ventricular arrhythmias origin. Contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance may help to identify in vivo this concealed substrate for risk stratification.

The original designation of "Arrhythmogenic right ventricular (dysplasia/) cardiomyopathy"(ARVC) was used by the scientists who first discovered the disease, in the pre-genetic and pre-cardiac magnetic resonance era, to describe a new heart muscle disease predominantly affecting the right ventricle, whose cardinal clinical manifestation was the occurrence of malignant ventricular arrhythmias. Subsequently, autopsy investigations, genotypephenotype correlations studies and the increasing use of contrast-enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance showed that the fibro-fatty replacement of the myocardium represents the distinctive phenotypic feature of the disease that affects the myocardium of both ventricles, with left ventricular involvement which may parallel or exceed the severity of right ventricular involvement. This has led to the new designation of "Arrhythmogenic Cardiomyopathy" (ACM), that represents the evolution of the original term of ARVC. The present International Expert Consensus document proposes an upgrade of the criteria for diagnosis of the entire spectrum of the phenotypic variants of ACM. The proposed "Padua criteria" derive from the diagnostic approach to ACM, which has been developed over 30 years by the multidisciplinary team of basic researchers and clinical cardiologists of the Medical School of the University of Padua. The Padua criteria are a working framework to improve the diagnosis of ACM by introducing new diagnostic criteria regarding tissue characterization findings by contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance, depolarization/repolarization ECG abnormalities and ventricular arrhythmia features for diagnosis of the left ventricular phenotype. The proposed diagnostic criteria need to be further validated by future clinical studies in large cohorts of patients.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background - COVID-19 has led to over 1 million deaths worldwide and has been associated with cardiac complications including cardiac arrhythmias. The incidence and pathophysiology of these manifestations remain elusive. In this worldwide survey of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who developed cardiac arrhythmias, we describe clinical characteristics associated with various arrhythmias, as well as global differences in modulations of routine electrophysiology practice during the pandemic. Methods - We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection worldwide with and without incident cardiac arrhythmias. Patients with documented atrial fibrillation (AF), atrial flutter (AFL), supraventricular tachycardia (SVT), non-sustained or sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT), ventricular fibrillation (VF), atrioventricular block (AVB), or marked sinus bradycardia (HR<40bpm) were classified as having arrhythmia. De-identified data was provided by each institution and analyzed. Results - Data was collected for 4,526 patients across 4 continents and 12 countries, 827 of whom had an arrhythmia. Cardiac comorbidities were common in patients with arrhythmia: 69% had hypertension, 42% diabetes mellitus, 30% had heart failure and 24% coronary artery disease. Most had no prior history of arrhythmia. Of those who did develop an arrhythmia, the majority (81.8%) developed atrial arrhythmias, 20.7% developed ventricular arrhythmias, and 22.6% had bradyarrhythmia. Regional differences suggested a lower incidence of AF in Asia compared to other continents (34% vs. 63%). Most patients in in North America and Europe received hydroxychloroquine, though the frequency of hydroxychloroquine therapy was constant across arrhythmia types. Forty-three percent of patients who developed arrhythmia were mechanically ventilated and 51% survived to hospital discharge. Many institutions reported drastic decreases in electrophysiology procedures performed. Conclusions - Cardiac arrhythmias are common and associated with high morbidity and mortality among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection. There were significant regional variations in the types of arrhythmias and treatment approaches.

Background This study assessed the prevalence of left ventricular ( LV ) involvement and characterized the clinical, electrocardiographic, and imaging features of LV phenotype in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy ( ARVC ). Differential diagnosis between ARVC ‐ LV phenotype and dilated cardiomyopathy ( DCM ) was evaluated. Methods and Results The study population included 87 ARVC patients (median age 34 years) and 153 DCM patients (median age 51 years). All underwent cardiac magnetic resonance with quantitative tissue characterization. Fifty‐eight ARVC patients (67%) had LV involvement, with both LV systolic dysfunction and LV late gadolinium enhancement ( LGE ) in 41/58 (71%) and LV ‐ LGE in isolation in 17 (29%). Compared with DCM , the ARVC ‐ LV phenotype was statistically significantly more often characterized by low QRS voltages in limb leads, T‐wave inversion in the inferolateral leads and major ventricular arrhythmias. LV ‐ LGE was found in all ARVC patients with LV systolic dysfunction and in 69/153 (45%) of DCM patients. Patients with ARVC and LV systolic dysfunction had a greater amount of LV ‐ LGE (25% versus 13% of LV mass; P <0.01), mostly localized in the subepicardial LV wall layers. An LV ‐ LGE ≥20% had a 100% specificity for diagnosis of ARVC ‐ LV phenotype. An inverse correlation between LV ejection fraction and LV ‐ LGE extent was found in the ARVC ‐ LV phenotype ( r =−0.63; P <0.01), but not in DCM ( r =−0.01; P =0.94). Conclusions LV involvement in ARVC is common and characterized by clinical and cardiac magnetic resonance features which differ from those seen in DCM . The most distinctive feature of ARVC ‐ LV phenotype is the large amount of LV ‐ LGE /fibrosis, which impacts directly and negatively on the LV systolic function.

Background: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is responsible for a worldwide pandemic, with a high rate of morbidity and mortality. The increasing evidence of an associated relevant prothrombotic coagulopathy has resulted in an increasing use of antithrombotic doses higher than usual in COVID-19 patients. Information on the benefit/risk ratio of this approach is still lacking. Objective: To assess the incidence of relevant bleeding complications in association with the antithrombotic strategy and its relationship with the amount of drug.

Criteria for diagnosis of arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy (ACM) were first proposed in 1994 and revised in 2010 by a Task Force. Although the Task Force criteria demonstrated a good accuracy for diagnosis of the original right ventricular phenotype (arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy), they lacked sensitivity for identification of the expanding phenotypic spectrum of ACM, which includes left‐sided variants and did not incorporate late‐gadolinium enhancement findings by cardiac magnetic resonance. The 2020 International criteria (“Padua criteria”) have been developed by International experts with the aim to improve the diagnosis of ACM by providing new criteria for the diagnosis of left ventricular phenotypic features. The key upgrade was the incorporation of tissue characterization findings by cardiac magnetic resonance for noninvasive detection of late‐gadolinium enhancement/myocardial fibrosis that are determinants for characterization of arrhythmogenic biventricular and left ventricular cardiomyopathy. The 2020 International criteria are heavily dependent on cardiac magnetic resonance, which has become mandatory to characterize the ACM phenotype and to exclude other diagnoses. New criteria regarding left ventricular depolarization and repolarization ECG abnormalities and ventricular arrhythmias of left ventricular origin were also provided. This article reviews the evolving approach to diagnosis of ACM, going back to the 1994 and 2010 International Task Force criteria and then grapple with the modern 2020 International criteria.

Aims The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical features of patients affected by arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy (AC), presenting with chest pain and myocardial enzyme release in the setting of normal coronary arteries (‘hot phase’). Methods and results We collected detailed anamnestic, clinical, instrumental, genetic, and histopathological findings as well as follow-up data in a series of AC patients who experienced a hot phase. A total of 23 subjects (12 males, mean age at the first episode 27 ± 16 years) were identified among 560 AC probands and family members (5%). At first episode, 10 patients (43%) already fulfilled AC diagnostic criteria. Twelve-lead electrocardiogram recorded during symptoms showed ST-segment elevation in 11 patients (48%). Endomyocardial biopsy was performed in 11 patients, 8 of them during the acute phase showing histologic evidence of virus-negative myocarditis in 88%. Cardiac magnetic resonance was performed in 21 patients, 12 of them during the acute phase; oedema and/or hyperaemia were detected in 7 (58%) and late gadolinium enhancement in 11 (92%). At the end of follow-up (mean 17 years, range 1–32), 12 additional patients achieved an AC diagnosis. Genetic testing was positive in 77% of cases and pathogenic mutations in desmoplakin gene were the most frequent. No patient complained of sustained ventricular arrhythmias or died suddenly during the ‘hot phase’. Conclusion ‘Hot phase’ represents an uncommon clinical presentation of AC, which often occurs in paediatric patients and carriers of desmoplakin gene mutations. Tissue characterization, family history, and genetic test represent fundamental diagnostic tools for differential diagnosis.