Challenges in the diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy.

Introduction. The diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) remains a challenging task. Despite the revised 2010 criteria of the ITF Task Force, most patients still face difficulties in establishing this diagnosis. Objective. To assess the clinical and genetic characteristics of patients with a preliminary diagnosis of “ARVC,” with a focus on the final diagnosis established after re-evaluation at the Republican Scientific and Practical Center of Cardiology (RSPC “Cardiology”). Material and methods. Twenty-eight patients (53.6% male, median age 35 [24; 43] years) with a preliminary diagnosis of ARVC referred to the RSPC “Cardiology” were examined. The clinical and instrumental evaluation included 12-lead ECG, 24-hour Holter monitoring, transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). The ARVC diagnosis was based on the 2010 ITF criteria and classified into definite, borderline, and possible categories. Genetic testing for mutations in genes associated with cardiomyopathies and inherited rhythm disorders was performed using next-generation sequencing (NGS). Results. Among the 28 patients with a preliminary diagnosis of ARVC, only 7 (25%) were diagnosed with definite ARVC according to the 2010 ITF criteria and confirmed by genotyping (mutations in the PKP2 and DSG genes in 5 patients, mutation in the non-desmosomal TMEM43 gene in 1 patient, and mutations in ILK and RBM20 genes in 1 patient). Eight (28.6%) patients were diagnosed with borderline ARVC, and 4 (14.3%) with possible ARVC. In 9 (32.1%) patients, the diagnosis of ARVC was ruled out due to misinterpretation of cardiac MRI. Genotyping revealed no ARVC-associated mutations in the borderline, possible, or excluded groups. A total of 7 (25%) patients received an ICD; of these, 6 were deemed appropriate, while 1 was considered inappropriate due to an unconfirmed ARVC diagnosis. Conclusions. A misdiagnosis of ARVC was found in 32.1% of patients suspected of having the condition. The most common reason for false suspicion was misinterpretation of cardiac MRI results, particularly regional dyskinesia/akinesia of the right ventricular wall due to factors such as pericardial constriction, right ventricular diverticulum, pectus excavatum, right ventricular enlargement in athletes, or frequent arrhythmias causing artifacts. Genotyping proved helpful in timely confirmation of the ARVC diagnosis in this patient cohort.

1. McKenna W.J., Thiene G., Nava A., et al. Diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy. Task Force of the Working Group Myocardial and Pericardial Disease of the European Society of Cardiology and of the Scientific Council on Cardiomyopathies of the International Society and Federation of Cardiology. Br Heart J. 1994;71(3):215-8. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.71.3.215

2. Marcus F.I., McKenna W.J., Sherrill D., et al Diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia: proposed modification of the task force criteria. Circulation. 2010;121(13):1533 41. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.840827

3. Sharma A., Assis F., James C.A., et al. Misdiagnosis of ARVC leading to inappropriate ICD implant and subsequent ICD removal lessons learned. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30(10):2020-2026. https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.14088

4. Groeneweg J.A., Bhonsale A., James C.A., et al. Clinical Presentation, Long-Term Follow-Up, and Outcomes of 1001 Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Dysplasia/Cardiomyopathy Patients and Family Members. Circ Cardiovasc Genet. 2015;8(3):437-46. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCGENETICS.114.001003

5. Basso C., Corrado D., Marcus F.I., et al. Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Lancet. 2009;373(9671):1289-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60256-7

6. James C.A., Jongbloed J.D.H., Hershberger R.E., et al. International Evidence Based Reappraisal of Genes Associated with Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy Using the Clinical Genome Resource Framework. Circ Genom Precis Med. 2021;14(3):e003273. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCGEN.120.003273

7. Cox M.G., van der Zwaag P.A., van der Werf C., et al. Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy: pathogenic desmosome mutations in index-patients predict outcome of family screening: Dutch arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy genotype phenotype follow-up study. Circulation. 2011;123(23):2690-700. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.988287

8. Kramer C.M., Barkhausen J., Bucciarelli-Ducci C., et al. Standardized cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) protocols: 2020 update. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2020;22(1):17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-020-00607-1

9. Richards S., Aziz N., Bale S., et al. ACMG Laboratory Quality Assurance Committee. Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Genet Med. 2015;17(5):405-24. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2015.30

10. Bendig G., Grimmler M., Huttner I.G., et al. Integrin-linked kinase, a novel component of the cardiac mechanical stretch sensor, controls contractility in the zebrafish heart. Genes Dev. 2006;20(17):2361-72. https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.1448306

11. Merner N.D., Hodgkinson K.A., Haywood A.F., et al. Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy type 5 is a fully penetrant, lethal arrhythmic disorder caused by a missense mutation in the TMEM43 gene. Am J Hum Genet. 2008;82(4):809-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2008.01.010

12. Liang W.C., Mitsuhashi H., Keduka E., et al. TMEM43 mutations in Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy-related myopathy. Ann Neurol. 2011;69(6):1005-13. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.22338

13. Padrón-Barthe L., Villalba-Orero M., Gómez-Salinero J.M., et al. Severe Cardiac Dysfunction and Death Caused by Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy Type 5 Are Improved by Inhibition of Glycogen Synthase Kinase-3β. Circulation. 2019;140(14):1188 1204. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.040366

14. Towbin J.A., McKenna W.J., Abrams D.J., et al. 2019 HRS expert consensus statement on evaluation, risk stratification, and management of arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy. Heart Rhythm. 2019;16(11):e301-e372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.05.007

15. Quarta G., Husain S.I., Flett A.S., et al. Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy mimics: role of cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2013;15(1):16. https://doi.org/10.1186/1532-429X-15-16

16. Sharma A., Assis F., James C.A., et al. Misdiagnosis of ARVC leading to inappropriate ICD implant and subsequent ICD removal lessons learned. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30(10):2020-2026. https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.14088

17. Bomma C., Rutberg J., Tandri H., et al. Misdiagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2004;15(3):300-6. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1540 8167.2004.03429.x

18. Sampognaro J.R., Gaine S.P., Sharma A., et al. Diagnostic pitfalls in patients referred for arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Heart Rhythm. 2023;20(12):1720-1726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2023.08.035