Objectives To compare the efficacy of beta-blockers (BB) in congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS). Background BB are the mainstay in managing LQTS. Studies comparing the efficacy of commonly-used BB are lacking and clinicians generally assume they are equally effective. Methods ECG and clinical parameters of 382 LQT1/LQT2 patients initiated on propranolol (n=134), metoprolol (n=147), and nadolol (n=101) were analyzed, excluding patients aged <1 year at BB initiation. Symptoms prior to therapy and the first breakthrough cardiac events (BCEs) were documented. Results Patients (56% females, 27% symptomatic, HR 76±16 bpm, QTc 472±46 ms) were started on BB therapy at a median age of 14 years (IQR 8–32 years). QTc-shortening with propranolol was significantly greater than with other BB in the total cohort and in the subset with QTc >480 ms. None of the asymptomatic patients had BCEs. Among symptomatic patients (n=101), 15 had BCEs (all syncopes). QTc-shortening was significantly less-pronounced among patients with BCEs. There was a greater risk of BCEs for symptomatic patients initiated on metoprolol compared to users of other two BB combined, after adjustment for genotype (OR 3.95, 95% CI 1.2–13.1, p=0.025). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a significantly lower event-free survival for symptomatic patients on metoprolol compared to propranolol/nadolol. Conclusions Propranolol has a significantly better QTc-shortening effect compared to metoprolol and nadolol, especially in patients with prolonged QTc. Propranolol and nadolol are equally effective whereas symptomatic patients started on metoprolol are at a significantly higher risk for BCEs. Metoprolol should not be used in symptomatic LQT1 and LQT2 patients.

BACKGROUND A puzzling feature of the long QT syndrome (LQTS) is that family members carrying the same mutation often have divergent symptoms and clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVES We tested the hypothesis that vagal and sympathetic control, as assessed from spectral analysis of spontaneous beat-to-beat variability of RR and QT intervals from standard 24-hour electrocardiogram Holter recordings, can modulate the severity of LQTS type 1 (LQT1) in 46 members of a South-African LQT1 founder population carrying the clinically severe KCNQ1-A341V mutation. METHODS Nonmutation carriers (NMCs, n = 14) were compared with mutation carriers (MCs, n = 32), 22 with and 10 without major symptoms. We assessed the effect of circadian rhythm and of beta-blocker therapy over traditional time and frequency domain RR and QT variability indices. RESULTS The asymptomatic MCs differed significantly from the symptomatic MCs and from NMCs in less vagal control of heart rate and more reactive sympathetic modulation of the QT interval, particularly during daytime when arrhythmia risk for LQT1 patients is greatest. CONCLUSIONS The present data identify an additional factor contributing to the differential arrhythmic risk among LQT1 patients carrying the same mutation. A “normal” autonomic control confers a high risk, whereas patients with higher sympathetic control of the QT interval and reduced vagal control of heart rate are at lower risk. This differential “autonomic make-up,” likely under genetic control, will allow refinement of risk stratification within LQTS families, leading to more targeted management.

The study assesses complexity of the cardiac control directed to the sinus node and to ventricles in long QT syndrome type 1 (LQT1) patients with KCNQ1-A341V mutation. Complexity was assessed via refined multiscale entropy (RMSE) computed over the beat-to-beat variability series of heart period (HP) and QT interval. HP and QT interval were approximated respectively as the temporal distance between two consecutive R-wave peaks and between the R-wave apex and T-wave end. Both measures were automatically taken from 24-hour electrocardiographic Holter traces recorded during daily activities in non mutation carriers (NMCs, n = 14) and mutation carriers (MCs, n = 34) belonging to a South African LQT1 founder population. The MC group was divided into asymptomatic (ASYMP, n = 11) and symptomatic (SYMP, n = 23) patients according to the symptom severity. Analyses were carried out during daytime (DAY, from 2PM to 6PM) and nighttime (NIGHT, from 12PM to 4AM) off and on beta-adrenergic blockade (BBoff and BBon). We found that the complexity of the HP variability at short time scale was under vagal control, being significantly increased during NIGHT and BBon both in ASYMP and SYMP groups, while the complexity of both HP and QT variability at long time scales was under sympathetic control, being smaller during NIGHT and BBon in SYMP subjects. Complexity indexes at long time scales in ASYMP individuals were smaller than those in SYMP ones regardless of therapy (i.e. BBoff or BBon), thus suggesting that a reduced complexity of the sympathetic regulation is protective in ASYMP individuals. RMSE analysis of HP and QT interval variability derived from routine 24-hour electrocardiographic Holter recordings might provide additional insights into the physiology of the cardiac control and might be fruitfully exploited to improve risk stratification in LQT1 population.