Objectives: The aim of our study was to assess the prognostic value of heart rate variability (HRV) in ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients treated by percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and optimal medical therapy. Methods: We enrolled 182 consecutive patients with a first STEMI (59.1 ± 11 years; 82.4% men) treated by primary PTCA. HRV was assessed on 24-hour Holter ECG recordings before discharge and 1 and 6 months after discharge. The primary end point was the occurrence of major clinical events (MCE), defined as death or new acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Results: At a follow-up of 42 ± 23 months, MCE occurred in 14 patients (7.6%; 3 deaths and 11 re-AMIs). HRV parameters before discharge were significantly lower in patients with MCE, with standard deviation of all RR intervals (SDNN) and very low frequency and low frequency (LF) amplitude being the most predictive variables. HRV assessed at follow-up instead did not significantly predict MCE. At multivariate analysis, only SDNN (HR 0.97; p = 0.02) and LF (HR 0.90; p = 0.04) remained significantly associated with MCE. Lower tertile SDNN and LF values were associated with a multivariate HR of 3.91 (p = 0.015) and of 2.92 (p = 0.048), respectively. Similar results were observed considering re-AMI only as the end point. Conclusions: In STEMI patients treated by PTCA, HRV assessed before discharge was an independent predictor of MCE and re-AMI.

The causes of coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMVD) in patients with cardiac syndrome X (CSX) are largely unknown. Common cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) and increased markers of inflammation have been associated with CMVD in some studies, but their role in determining CMVD in CSX patients remains poorly known. We studied 71 CSX patients (56 ± 9 years, 23 men) and 20 healthy volunteers (52 ± 7 years, nine men). Using transthoracic Doppler echocardiography, coronary microvascular vasodilator function was assessed in the left anterior descending coronary artery as the ratio of diastolic coronary blood flow (CBF) velocity at peak intravenous adenosine administration and during cold pressor test (CPT) to the respective basal CBF velocity values. Common CVRFs tended to be more frequent and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were higher (P < 0.001) in CSX patients than in controls. Both CBF responses to adenosine (2.05 ± 0.6 vs. 2.92 ± 0.9, P < 0.001) and to CPT (1.71 ± 0.6 vs. 2.42 ± 0.7, P < 0.001) were lower in CSX patients than in controls. The differences between the two groups in CBF response to adenosine and in CBF response to CPT remained highly significant (P < 0.01 for both) after adjustment for all CVRFs, including serum CRP levels. In CSX patients, both endothelium-dependent and endothelium-independent CMVD cannot be reliably predicted by CVRFs (including serum CRP levels), alone or in combination.

Low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is the main indication of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death, but ICD therapy at follow-up occurs in a minority of patients. We investigated whether heart rate variability (HRV) may improve risk stratification in DCM patients. We studied 42 patients (age 67.3 ± 3.5; 37 males) who had undergone ICD implant for either idiopathic or ischaemic DCM (LVEF <40%) 34.6 ± 19.7 months prior to the study (range 6–84). Patients underwent 24 h electrocardiographic Holter monitoring, and HRV was assessed over 2 hours in the afternoon showing stable sinus rhythm. Left ventricular ejection fraction was measured by two-dimensional echocardiography. The serum levels of C-reactive protein and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were also obtained. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of appropriate ICD shocks in the 6 months preceding the study. The occurrence of appropriate ICD discharge from ICD implant was considered as a secondary endpoint. In the last 6 months, appropriate ICD shocks had occurred in seven patients (17%). There were no differences between patients with and without ICD shocks in clinical variables, as well as in LVEF and in C-reactive protein and NT-proBNP serum levels. In contrast, most HRV parameters were significantly depressed in patients with, compared with those without, ICD shocks; the most significant difference was shown for the average of the standard deviations of RR intervals in all consecutive 5 min segments (n ¼ 12) within the 2 h (26.7 ± 9 vs. 39.7 ± 14 ms; P= 0.02) in the time domain and for LF amplitude (8.4 ± 3 vs. 14.8 ± 7 ms; P= 0.02) in the frequency domain. Implantable cardioverter defibrillator discharge had occurred in 11 patients (26%) since ICD implant (average 35 months). No clinical or laboratory variable showed significant differences between patients with or without ICD discharge, except very low-frequency (VLF) amplitude (23.8 ± 7 vs. 30.8 ± 10.6 ms, respectively; P= 0.049). In ICD patients with reduced LVEF, several depressed HRV indices were significantly associated with appropriate ICD shocks in the previous 6 months, and VLF amplitude was the only variable significantly associated with ICD shocks recorded since ICD implant. These data suggest that full HRV analysis might be helpful for improving risk stratification for life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias and ICD indication in patients with DCM.

Background: Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia (ARVC/D) is associated with an increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Risk stratification of ARVC/D patients, however, remains an unresolved issue. In this study we investigated whether heart rate variability (HRV) can be helpful in identifying ARVC/D patients with increased risk of arrhythmic events. Methods and Results: We studied 30 consecutive patients (17 males; 45.4±18 years) with ARVC/D, diagnosed according to guideline criteria; 15 patients (50%) had received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) for primary SCD prevention. HRV was assessed on 24-h ECG Holter monitoring. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major arrhythmic events (SCD, sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT), ICD therapy for sustained VT or ventricular fibrillation (VF)). During the follow-up period (19±7 months), no deaths occurred, but 5 patients (17%) experienced arrhythmic events (4 VTs and 1 VF, all in the ICD group). All HRV parameters were significantly lower in patients with, compared with those without, arrhythmic events. Low-frequency amplitude was the most significant HRV variable associated with arrhythmic events in univariate Cox regression analysis (P=0.017), and was the only significant predictor of arrhythmic events in multivariable regression analysis (hazard ratio 0.88, P=0.047), together with unexplained syncope (hazard ratio 16.1, P=0.039). Conclusions: Our data show that among ARVC/D patients HRV analysis might be helpful in identifying those with increased risk of major arrhythmic events. (Circ J 2012; 76: 618-623)