Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 26, 2026

Investigating the Pathogenesis of MYH7 Mutation Gly823Glu in Familial Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy using a Mouse Model
Published on: August 8, 2022
Personalized Sudden Cardiac Death Risk Stratification in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Beyond Conventional Risk Scores
Jacopo Costantino1,2,3, Federico Ballatore1, Daniele Porcelli3
1Department of Medical and Cardiovascular Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Roma, Italy.
Insights
Identifying hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) patients at risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) is challenging. Personalized risk assessment combining scores, advanced imaging, genetics, and patient values is crucial for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) decisions.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Genetics
- Medical Devices
Background:
- Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a common inherited heart muscle disease.
- It is a significant cause of ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death (SCD), especially in young individuals.
- Accurately identifying high-risk patients for primary prevention with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) remains a clinical challenge.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review current strategies for risk stratification in HCM.
- To discuss limitations of existing risk scores and the role of additional risk modifiers.
- To explore the impact of emerging therapies and the importance of personalized decision-making for ICD implantation.
Main Methods:
- Review of current European (HCM Risk-SCD score) and American risk stratification paradigms.
- Discussion of additional prognostic factors including late gadolinium enhancement, left ventricular dysfunction, apical aneurysm, and genetic findings.
- Consideration of emerging disease-modifying therapies like Mavacamten and their potential impact on risk assessment.
Main Results:
- Current risk stratification strategies (HCM Risk-SCD score and clinical markers) have strengths and limitations.
- Advanced phenotyping (e.g., late gadolinium enhancement, genetic findings) provides incremental prognostic information.
- The efficacy of new therapies in reducing SCD risk requires further investigation.
Conclusions:
- Risk assessment for SCD in HCM is evolving beyond traditional scores.
- A personalized and dynamic approach integrating predictive tools, advanced phenotyping, therapies, and patient preferences is essential.
- Shared decision-making is critical for guiding individualized ICD implantation decisions in HCM patients.
Abstract:
Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (HCM) is one of the most common inherited cardiomyopathies and remains an important cause of ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death (SCD), particularly in younger individuals. Although the annual incidence of arrhythmic death is relatively low in contemporary cohorts, identifying those patients who may benefit from primary prevention with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) remains a major clinical challenge. Current risk stratification strategies rely on two principal paradigms. The European approach is centered on the HCM Risk-SCD score, whereas the American approach is mainly based on major clinical risk markers. Both strategies have important strengths and limitations, reflecting the persistent difficulty of accurately predicting arrhythmic events in such a heterogeneous disease. The HCM Risk-SCD score has demonstrated robust external validation and high specificity for identifying patients at higher risk, but it may fail to recognize some vulnerable individuals who remain below conventional treatment thresholds. For this reason, several additional risk modifiers have gained increasing relevance in contemporary practice. Among them, extensive late gadolinium enhancement, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, apical aneurysm, and clinically meaningful genetic findings may provide important incremental prognostic information beyond traditional models. Emerging disease-modifying therapies, in particular Mavacamten, may also influence future risk assessment. However, whether these improvements translate into a true reduction in SCD risk remains uncertain. Importantly, the decision to implant an ICD should not depend on numerical risk alone. It should arise from a process of shared decision-making integrating estimated risk, treatment burden, competing comorbidities, age, lifestyle, and patient values. In this context, the concept of an individualized threshold of "acceptable risk" becomes central. In conclusion, prevention of SCD in HCM is moving beyond conventional scores toward a personalized and dynamic framework in which predictive tools, advanced phenotyping, evolving therapies, clinical expertise, and patient preferences are combined to guide individualized care.
Related Concept Videos
Cardiomyopathy III: Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care
Cardiomyopathy I: Introduction and Classification
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Heart Failure IV: Classification and Diagnostic Evaluation
Pathophysiology of Heart Failure