Sudden cardiac death in Brazil: a community-based autopsy series (2006-2010)

Sudden death in young South European population: a cross-sectional study of postmortem cases

To describe the annual incidence and the leading causes of sudden non-cardiac and cardiac death (SCD) in children and young adult Portuguese population. We retrospectively reviewed autopsy of sudden unexpected deaths reports from the Portuguese National Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences' database, between 2012 and 2016, for the central region of Portugal, Azores and Madeira (ages 1-40: 26% of the total population). During a 5-year period, 159 SD were identified, corresponding to an annual incidence of 2,4 (95%confidence interval, 1,5-3,6) per 100.000 people-years. Victims had a mean age of 32 ± 7 years-old, and 72,3% were male. There were 70,4% cardiac, 16,4% respiratory and 7,5% neurologic causes of SD. The most frequent cardiac anatomopathological diagnosis was atherosclerotic coronary artery disease (CAD) (33,0%). There were 15,2% victims with left ventricular hypertrophy, with a diagnosis of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy only possible in 2,7%. The prevalence of cardiac pathological findings of uncertain significance was 30,4%. In conclusion, the annual incidence of SD was low. Atherosclerotic CAD was diagnosed in 33,0% victims, suggesting the need to intensify primary prevention measures in the young. The high prevalence of pathological findings of uncertain significance emphasizes the importance of molecular autopsy and screening of first-degree relatives.

Causes of death in patients with autoimmune and rheumatic diseases-a 16-year autopsy-based study

Introduction

the autopsy is an essential medical procedure; however, its use has declined over the decades. In autoimmune and rheumatological diseases, anatomical and microscopic diagnosis is critical to diagnose of the cause of death. For this reason, our objective is to describe the cause of death in patients diagnosed with autoimmune and rheumatic diseases who underwent an autopsy in a Pathology reference center in Colombia.

Materials and methods

a retrospective and descriptive study of autopsy reports.

Results

between January 2004 and December 2019, 47 autopsies of patients with autoimmune and rheumatological diseases were performed. Systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis were the most common diseases. The leading cause of death was related to infections, being opportunistic infections in the majority of the cases.

Conclusions

our autopsy-based study was focused on patients with autoimmune and rheumatological conditions. Infections are the leading cause of death, particularly opportunistic infections, diagnosed mainly by microscopy. Thus, the autopsy should continue to be considered the "gold standard" to determine the cause of death in this population.

Management of Cardiovascular Disease in Patients With COVID-19 and Chronic Chagas Disease: Implications to Prevent a Scourge Still Larger

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are the most important cause of morbidity and mortality in the general population. Because the high prevalence of COVID-19 and chronic Chagas disease (CCD) where the latter is endemic, all such diseases will likely be observed in the same patient. While COVID-19 can provoke generalized endotheliitis, which can lead to a cytokine storm and a hyper-coagulable state culminating into in-site and at a distance thrombosis. Therefore, small-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD), cerebrovascular disease, thromboembolism, and arrhythmias are prominent findings in COVID-19. In CCD, small-vessel CAD, cardioembolic stroke, pulmonary embolism, heart failure and arrhythmias are frequently observed as a result of a similar but less intense mechanism. Consequently, the association of CCD and COVID-19 will likely increase the incidence of CVD. Thus, doctors on the frontline should be on the alert for this diagnostic possibility so that the proper treatment can be given without any delay.

A review of the causes and risk factors for sudden unexpected death in the young

Sudden unexpected death in the young (SUDY) is a tragic event resulting in the fatality of seemingly healthy individuals between the ages of one and 40 years. Whilst studies have been performed on sudden unexpected death in infants, children, and adults respectively, little is known about trends in risk factors and causes of death of SUDY cases. Understanding the factors surrounding these deaths could lead to targeted interventions for at-risk individuals. Hence, a systematic approach to investigate the reported possible causes of SUDY was employed using three major databases and Primo, wherein 67 relevant articles were identified and 2 additional guidelines were read. Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy and sudden cardiac events were well-established causes of death with risk factors such as male predominance, substance use and a familial history identified. It was acknowledged that while the cause of death is established following post-mortem examination in many cases, some remain non-specific or undetermined. Considering the genetic etiology, these cases would be ideal candidates for molecular autopsies in the future. Thus, this review emphasized the significance of acquiring the relevant information to aid in resolving cause of death of these SUDY cases and subsequently highlighted the potential for further studies on risk factors and the value of molecular autopsies.

Arrest etiology among patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac arrest etiology is often assigned according to the Utstein template, which differentiates medical (formerly "presumed cardiac") from other causes. These categories are poorly defined, contain within them many clinically distinct etiologies, and are rarely based on diagnostic testing. Optimal clinical care and research require more rigorous characterization of arrest etiology.

METHODS

We developed a novel system to classify arrest etiology using a structured chart review of consecutive patients treated at a single center after in- or out-of-hospital cardiac arrest over four years. Two reviewers independently reviewed a random subset of 20% of cases to calculate inter-rater reliability. We used X² and Kruskal-Wallis tests to compare baseline clinical characteristics and outcomes across etiologies.

RESULTS

We identified 14 principal arrest etiologies, and developed objective diagnostic criteria for each. Inter-rater reliability was high (kappa = 0.80). Median age of 986 included patients was 60 years, 43% were female and 71% arrested out-of-hospital. The most common etiology was respiratory failure (148 (15%)). A minority (255 (26%)) arrested due to cardiac causes. Only nine (1%) underwent a diagnostic workup that was unrevealing of etiology. Rates of awakening and survival to hospital discharge both differed across arrest etiologies, with survival ranging from 6% to 60% (both P < 0.001), and rates of favorable outcome ranging from 0% to 40% (P < 0.001). Timing and mechanism of death (e.g. multisystem organ failure or brain death) also differed significantly across etiologies.

CONCLUSIONS

Arrest etiology was identifiable in the majority cases via systematic chart review. "Cardiac" etiologies may be less common than previously thought. Substantial clinical heterogeneity exists across etiologies, suggesting previous classification systems may be insufficient.

Amiodarone versus other pharmacological interventions for prevention of sudden cardiac death

BACKGROUND

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is one of the main causes of cardiac death. There are two main strategies to prevent it: managing cardiovascular risk factors and reducing the risk of ventricular arrhythmias. Implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICDs) constitute the standard therapy for both primary and secondary prevention; however, they are not widely available in settings with limited resources. The antiarrhythmic amiodarone has been proposed as an alternative to ICD.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of amiodarone for primary or secondary prevention in SCD compared with placebo or no intervention or any other antiarrhythmic drugs in participants at high risk (primary prevention) or who have recovered from a cardiac arrest or a syncope due to Ventricular Tachycardia/Ventricular Fibrillation, or VT/VF (secondary prevention).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO) and LILACS on 26 March 2015. We reviewed reference lists of included studies and selected reviews on the topic, contacted authors of included studies, screened relevant meetings and searched in registers for ongoing trials. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials assessing the efficacy of amiodarone versus placebo, no intervention, or other antiarrhythmics in adults. For primary prevention we considered participants at high risk for SCD. For secondary prevention we considered participants recovered from cardiac arrest or syncope due to ventricular arrhythmias.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and extracted relevant data. We contacted trial authors for missing data. We performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model. We calculated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Three studies included more than one comparison.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 studies (9,997 participants). Seventeen studies evaluated amiodarone for primary prevention and six for secondary prevention. Only three studies used an ICD concomitantly with amiodarone for the comparison (all of them for secondary prevention).For primary prevention, amiodarone compared to placebo or no intervention (17 studies, 8383 participants) reduced SCD (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.88), cardiac mortality (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.77 to 0.96) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.00). The quality of the evidence was low.Compared to other antiarrhythmics (three studies, 540 participants), amiodarone reduced SCD (RR 0.44; 95% CI 0.19 to 1.00), cardiac mortality (RR 0.41; 95% CI 0.20 to 0.86) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.37; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.76). The quality of the evidence was moderate.For secondary prevention, amiodarone compared to placebo or no intervention (two studies, 440 participants) appeared to increase the risk of SCD (RR 4.32; 95% CI 0.87 to 21.49) and all-cause mortality (RR 3.05; 1.33 to 7.01). However, the quality of the evidence was very low. Compared to other antiarrhythmics (four studies, 839 participants) amiodarone appeared to increase the risk of SCD (RR 1.40; 95% CI 0.56 to 3.52; very low quality of evidence), but there was no effect in all-cause mortality (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.42; low quality evidence).Amiodarone was associated with an increase in pulmonary and thyroid adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low to moderate quality evidence that amiodarone reduces SCD, cardiac and all-cause mortality when compared to placebo or no intervention for primary prevention, and its effects are superior to other antiarrhythmics.It is uncertain if amiodarone reduces or increases SCD and mortality for secondary prevention because the quality of the evidence was very low.