Left anterior hemiblock in acute myocardial infarction. Incidence and clinical significance in relation to the presence of bundle branch block and to the absence of intraventricular conduction defects
- PMID: 665320
Left anterior hemiblock in acute myocardial infarction. Incidence and clinical significance in relation to the presence of bundle branch block and to the absence of intraventricular conduction defects
Abstract
The incidence of intraventricular conduction defects was examined retrospectively in 449 consecutive patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The incidence of left anterior hemiblock (LAH), right bundle branch block (RBBB), left bundle branch block (LBBB) and RBBB+LAH was 12.2, 4.2, 3.8 and 2.5%, respectively. At least 24 patients (5.8%) developed LAH as a result of the AMI. LAH was present in 20% (33/164) of patients with anterior infarction, in 14% (18/131) of those with infarction of undetermined localization, and in 3% (4/143) of patients with diaphragm infarction. The incidence of complete atrioventricular (AV) block in patients with LAH was 6% and in patients with no intraventicular conduction defects 7%. In patients with RBBB, RBBB+LAH and LBBB, the incidence of complete AV block was 37, 45 and 18%, respectively. Severe pump failure occurred with the same low incidence in patients with LAH as in patients without intraventricular conduction defects, but was much more common in patients with complete bundle branch block (BBB). The mortality rate for patients with LAH was 22% and for patients with no intraventricular conduction defects 21%. In patients with RBBB, RBBB+LAH and LBBB, the mortality rates were 53, 55 and 53%, respectively. Patients with complete BBB had a higher age and a higher incidence of previous AMI than the others. Compared to patients with no intraventricular conduction defects, the presence of LAH did not increase the mortality rate, or the risk of developing severe heart failure or complete AV block, in contrast to the serious prognosis in patients with complete BBB.
Similar articles
-
Prognostic differences between different types of bundle branch block during the early phase of acute myocardial infarction: insights from the Hirulog and Early Reperfusion or Occlusion (HERO)-2 trial.Eur Heart J. 2006 Jan;27(1):21-8. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi622. Epub 2005 Nov 3. Eur Heart J. 2006. PMID: 16269419 Clinical Trial.
-
[Prognostic significance of the intraventricular blocks during acute myocardial infarction (author's transl)].G Ital Cardiol. 1975;5(4):526-35. G Ital Cardiol. 1975. PMID: 1232014 Italian.
-
[Electrophysiological analysis of atrioventricular and intraventricular conduction in bi- and tri-fascicular blocks].Minerva Cardioangiol. 1997 Mar;45(3):87-93. Minerva Cardioangiol. 1997. PMID: 9213825 Italian.
-
Hemiblocks revisited.Circulation. 2007 Mar 6;115(9):1154-63. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.637389. Circulation. 2007. PMID: 17339573 Review.
-
Bundle branch blocks and/or hemiblocks complicating acute myocardial ischemia or infarction.J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2018 Aug;52(3):287-292. doi: 10.1007/s10840-018-0430-3. Epub 2018 Aug 22. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2018. PMID: 30136134 Review.
Cited by
-
Left ventricular systolic time intervals in patients with acute myocardial infarction.Br Heart J. 1980 May;43(5):506-13. doi: 10.1136/hrt.43.5.506. Br Heart J. 1980. PMID: 7378209 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources