Aims In catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT), the exercise-stress test (EST) is the cornerstone for the diagnosis, risk stratification, and assessment of therapeutic efficacy, but its repeatability is unknown. We aimed to test the repeatability of ventricular arrhythmia characteristics on the EST in patients with CPVT. Methods and results EST-pairs (ESTs performed within 18 months between 2005 and 2021, on the same protocol, and without or on the exact same treatment) of patients with RYR2-mediated CPVT from two specialized centres were included. The primary endpoint was the repeatability of the maximum ventricular arrhythmia score [VAS: 0 for the absence of premature ventricular contractions (PVCs); 1 for isolated PVCs; 2 for bigeminal PVCs; 3 for couplets; and 4 for non-sustained ventricular tachycardia]. Secondary outcomes were the repeatability of the heart rate at the first PVC and the ΔVAS (the absolute difference in VAS between the EST-pairs). A total of 104 patients with 349 EST-pairs were included. The median duration between ESTs was 343 (interquartile range, 189–378) days. Sixty (17.2%) EST-pairs were off therapy. The repeatability of the VAS was moderate {Krippendorf α, 0.56 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.48–0.64]}, and the repeatability of the heart rate at the first PVC was substantial [intra-class correlation coefficient, 0.78 (95% CI, 0.71–0.84)]. The use of medication was associated with a higher odds for a ΔVAS > 1 (odds ratio = 3.52; 95% CI, 2.46–4.57; P = 0.020). Conclusion The repeatability of ventricular arrhythmia characteristics was moderate to substantial. This underlines the need for multiple ESTs in CPVT patients and CPVT suspicious patients and it provides the framework for assessing the therapeutic efficacy of novel CPVT therapies.

Introduction Ambulatory assessment of the heart rate–corrected QT interval (QTc) can be of diagnostic value, for example in patients on QTc-prolonging medication. Repeating sequential 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) to monitor the QTc is cumbersome, but mobile ECG (mECG) devices can potentially solve this problem. As the accuracy of single-lead mECG devices is reportedly variable, a multilead mECG device may be more accurate. Methods This prospective dual-centre study included outpatients visiting our cardiology clinics for any indication. Participants underwent an mECG recording using a smartphone-enabled 6‑lead mECG device immediately before or immediately after a conventional 12-lead ECG recording. Multiple QTc values in both recordings were manually measured in leads I and II using the tangent method and subsequently compared. Results In total, 234 subjects were included (mean ± standard deviation (SD) age: 57 ± 17 years; 58% males), of whom 133 (57%) had cardiac disease. QTc measurement in any lead was impossible due to artefacts in 16 mECGs (7%) and no 12-lead ECGs. Mean (± SD) QTc in lead II on the mECG and 12-lead ECG was 401 ± 30 and 406 ± 31 ms, respectively. Mean (± SD) absolute difference in QTc values between both modalities was 12 ± 9 ms (r = 0.856; p < 0.001). In 55% of the subjects, the absolute difference between QTc values was < 10 ms. Conclusion A 6-lead mECG allows for QTc assessment with good accuracy and can be used safely in ambulatory QTc monitoring. This may improve patient satisfaction and reduce healthcare costs.