首页> 外文期刊>Japanese heart journal >The Role of Arrhythmia and Left Ventricular Dysfunction in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Bundle Branch Block
【24h】

The Role of Arrhythmia and Left Ventricular Dysfunction in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Bundle Branch Block

机译:心律失常和左室功能障碍在急性心肌梗死和束支传导阻滞患者中的作用

获取原文
           

摘要

To determine the immediate and remote prognostic significance of bundle branch block (BBB) associated with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), 40 patients with AMI and BBB were studied. One hundred forty-four patients with AMI but without BBB were evaluated during the in-hospital phase and 45 of them were taken as a control group. These patients were followed for an average of 15 months (3-28 months). Arrhythmias and left ventricular function were investigated with 24-hr Holter monitoring and echocardiography, respectively.The hospital mortality was significantly greater in patients with BBB than in the control group (32.5% vs 10.4%, p<0.001). The main cause of mortality was pump failure in the group with BBB (76.9%) and ventricular fibrillation in the control group (53.3%). The peak creatine kinase level was significantly higher in the group with BBB than in the control group (2094.8±288.4IU/L vs 416.7±30.5IU/L, p<0.001).In patients with BBB prophylactic temporary pacemaker insertion was not found to improve the hospital mortality rate. In the hospital phase, although 32% of the patients with BBB had complicated arrhythmias (multiform, paired VPB, runs, R-on-T) the cause of death in 10 of the 13 patients who died was pump failure but not arrhythmia. In patients with BBB the wall motion index and the number of patients who had a left ventricular aneurysm were greater than in patients without BBB (9.5±0.9 vs 6.3±0.6, p<0.01 and 52.0% vs 14.3%, p<0.01, respectively).In patients with BBB follow-up mortality (12.0%) was lower than hospital mortality (32.5%). During the follow-up period there was no significant difference between patients with BBB and those without with regard to complicated arrhythmias (14.8% vs 15.6%).These results indicate that the main cause of poor prognosis during the hospital period in patients with AMI and BBB was not arrhythmia or conduction disturbance but severe pump failure due to extensive myocardial necrosis. Prophylactic temporary pacemaker insertion did not improve the hospital mortality rate of these patients, and patients with AMI and BBB who survive the in-hospital phase after infarction have a good prognosis during the following 15 months.
机译:为了确定与急性心肌梗死(AMI)相关的束支传导阻滞(BBB)的即时和远程预后意义,研究了40例AMI和BBB患者。在住院期间评估了144例AMI但无BBB的AMI患者,其中45例为对照组。这些患者平均随访15个月(3-28个月)。心律失常和左心室功能分别通过24小时动态心电图监测和超声心动图检查.BBB患者的医院死亡率显着高于对照组(32.5%,vs.10.4%,p <0.001)。死亡的主要原因是BBB组的泵衰竭(76.9%)和对照组的心室纤颤(53.3%)。 BBB组的肌酸激酶峰值显着高于对照组(2094.8±288.4IU / L vs 416.7±30.5IU / L,p <0.001)。在BBB患者中未发现预防性临时起搏器插入提高医院死亡率。在医院阶段,尽管32%的BBB患者患有复杂的心律不齐(多形,配对VPB,运行,R-on-T),但在13例死亡患者中,有10例的死因是泵衰竭而非心律失常。 BBB患者的壁运动指数和左室动脉瘤患者的数量均高于无BBB的患者(9.5±0.9 vs 6.3±0.6,p <0.01和52.0%,vs 14.3%,p BBB患者的随访死亡率(12.0%)低于医院死亡率(32.5%)。在随访期间,BBB患者与无复杂性心律失常患者之间无显着差异(分别为14.8%和15.6%)。这些结果表明,住院期间预后不良的主要原因是患有AMI和BBB的患者不是由于广泛的心肌坏死引起的心律失常或传导障碍,而是严重的泵衰竭。预防性临时起搏器的插入并不能提高这些患者的住院死亡率,并且在梗塞后在住院期间幸存的AMI和BBB患者在接下来的15个月中预后良好。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号