ArticleEuropean heart journal. Case reports2026
Electrical storm in pregnancy uncovering an arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy: a case report.
Article in European heart journal. Case reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pregnancy involves numerous physiological changes in the cardiovascular system to guarantee foetal metabolic demands. In patients with cardiovascular disease, these adaptations can decompensate their underlying condition, leading to maternal and obstetric complications.We report a case of arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy presenting as an electrical storm during pregnancy, highlighting both diagnostic and management challenges. Case summary: A 35-year-old pregnant woman at 18 weeks of gestation presented with an electrical storm, experiencing multiple episodes of sustained ventricular tachycardia. Diagnostic tests, including a non-contrast cardiac magnetic resonance, were suggestive of biventricular arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy. After a multidisciplinary team discussion, the patient was treated with antiarrhythmic agents, and an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator was implanted. She was discharged after 10 days, and a delivery plan was made for a scheduled induction at 38 weeks, which proceeded without complications. Genetic testing revealed a desmoplakin (DSP) mutation, further supporting the diagnosis. Discussion: Pregnancy can precipitate arrhythmic events, particularly in women with underlying cardiovascular disease. This case illustrates how pregnancy-induced haemodynamic stress may trigger previously undiagnosed cardiomyopathy. Management of such cases requires a multidisciplinary approach, adherence to clinical guidelines, and careful balancing of maternal and foetal risks. The patient's successful management, including guided antiarrhythmic therapy and device implantation with minimal radiation exposure, highlights the importance of individualized care and the role of a dedicated cardio-obstetrics team.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.