Cardiac ryanodine receptor (RyR2) gain-of-function mutations cause catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, a condition characterized by prominent ventricular ectopy in response to catecholamine stress, which can be reproduced on exercise stress testing (EST). However, reports of sudden cardiac death (SCD) have emerged in EST-negative individuals who have loss-of-function (LOF) RyR2 mutations. The clinical relevance of RyR2 LOF mutations including their pathogenic mechanism, diagnosis, and treatment are all unknowns. Here, we performed clinical and genetic evaluations of individuals who suffered from SCD and harbored an LOF RyR2 mutation. We carried out electrophysiological studies using a programed electrical stimulation protocol consisting of a long-burst, long-pause, and short-coupled (LBLPS) ventricular extra-stimulus. Linkage analysis of RyR2 LOF mutations in six families revealed a combined logarithm of the odds ratio for linkage score of 11.479 for a condition associated with SCD with negative EST. A RyR2 LOF mouse model exhibited no catecholamine-provoked ventricular arrhythmias as in humans but did have substantial cardiac electrophysiological remodeling and an increased propensity for early afterdepolarizations. The LBLPS pacing protocol reliably induced ventricular arrhythmias in mice and humans having RyR2 LOF mutations, whose phenotype is otherwise concealed before SCD. Furthermore, treatment with quinidine and flecainide abolished LBLPS-induced ventricular arrhythmias in model mice. Thus, RyR2 LOF mutations underlie a previously unknown disease entity characterized by SCD with normal EST that we have termed RyR2 Ca2+ release deficiency syndrome (CRDS). Our study provides insights into the mechanism of CRDS, reports a specific CRDS diagnostic test, and identifies potentially efficacious anti-CRDS therapies.

BACKGROUND: Long QT syndrome (LQTS) is associated with potentially fatal arrhythmias. Treatment is very effective, but its diagnosis may be challenging. Importantly, different methods are used to assess the QT interval, which makes its recognition difficult. QT experts advocate manual measurements with the tangent or threshold method. However, differences between these methods and their performance in LQTS diagnosis have not been established. We aimed to assess similarities and differences between these 2 methods for QT interval analysis to aid in accurate QT assessment for LQTS. METHODS: Patients with a confirmed pathogenic variant in KCNQ1(LQT1), KCNH2(LQT2), or SCN5A(LQT3) genes and their family members were included. Genotype-positive patients were identified as LQTS cases and genotype-negative family members as controls. ECGs were analyzed with both methods, providing inter-and intrareader validity and diagnostic accuracy. Cutoff values based on control population's 95th and 99th percentiles, and LQTS-patients' 1st and 5th percentiles were established based on the method to correct for heart rate, age, and sex. RESULTS: We included 1484 individuals from 265 families, aged 33±21 years and 55% females. In the total cohort, QT Tangent was 10.4 ms shorter compared with QT Threshold (95% limits of agreement±20.5 ms, P<0.0001). For all genotypes, QT Tangent was shorter than QT Threshold (P<0.0001), but this was less pronounced in LQT2. Both methods yielded a high interand intrareader validity (intraclass correlation coefficient >0.96), and a high diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve >0.84). Using the current guideline cutoff (QTc interval 480 ms), both methods had similar specificity but yielded a different sensitivity. QTc interval cutoff values of QT Tangent were lower compared with QT Threshold and different depending on the correction for heart rate, age, and sex. CONCLUSION: The QT interval varies depending on the method used for its assessment, yet both methods have a high validity and can both be used in diagnosing LQTS. However, for diagnostic purposes current guideline cutoff values yield different results for these 2 methods and could result in inappropriate reassurance or treatment. Adjusted cutoff values are therefore specified for method, correction formula, age, and sex. In addition, a freely accessible online probability calculator for LQTS (www.QTcalculator.org) has been made available as an aid in the interpretation of the QT interval.

Catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT) is an inherited cardiac arrhythmia disorder that is characterized by emotion-and exercise-induced polymorphic ventricular arrhythmias and may lead to sudden cardiac death (SCD). CPVT plays an important role in SCD in the young and therefore recognition and adequate treatment of the disease are of vital importance. In the past years tremendous improvements have been made in the diagnostic methods and treatment of the disease. In this review, we summarize the clinical characteristics, genetics, and diagnostic and therapeutic strategies of CPVT and describe the most recent advances and some of the current challenges. (Circ J 2016; 80: 1285 -1291

Aims In patients with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT), implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks are sometimes ineffective and may even trigger fatal electrical storms. We assessed the efficacy and complications of ICDs placed in patients with CPVT who presented with a sentinel event of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) while undiagnosed and therefore untreated. Methods and results We analysed 136 patients who presented with SCA and in whom CPVT was diagnosed subsequently, leading to the initiation of guideline-directed therapy, including β-blockers, flecainide, and/or left cardiac sympathetic denervation. An ICD was implanted in 79 patients (58.1%). The primary outcome of the study was sudden cardiac death (SCD). The secondary outcomes were composite outcomes of SCD, SCA, appropriate ICD shocks, and syncope. After a median follow-up of 4.8 years, SCD had occurred in three patients (3.8%) with an ICD and none of the patients without an ICD (P = 0.1). SCD, SCA, or appropriate ICD shocks occurred in 37 patients (46.8%) with an ICD and 9 patients (15.8%) without an ICD (P < 0.0001). Inappropriate ICD shocks occurred in 19 patients (24.7%) and other device-related complications in 22 patients (28.9%). Conclusion In previously undiagnosed patients with CPVT who presented with SCA, an ICD was not associated with improved survival. Instead, the ICD was associated with both a high rate of appropriate ICD shocks and inappropriate ICD shocks along with other device-related complications. Strict adherence to guideline-directed therapy without an ICD may provide adequate protection in these patients without all the potential disadvantages of an ICD.