Advertisement

What Is the Clinical and Prognostic Significance of Atrioventricular and Intraventricular Conduction Defects?

  • E. Piccolo
  • G. Zuin

Abstract

In dealing with these electrocardiographic questions, we cannot leave aside the classical notions developed during the pre-thrombolytic era, since these will always constitute, as much as possible, the premise and the point of reference for the various analyses that we will develop. Moreover, we will attempt to deal separately with the incidence of the various conduction defects and their diagnostic and prognostic significance. In addition, our assessment of prognostic significance will be subdivided in order to deal separately with the period of hospitalization and the post-discharge period up to a year after the onset of infarction.

Keywords

Acute Myocardial Infarction Left Bundle Branch Block Inferior Myocardial Infarction Suspected Acute Myocardial Infarction Acute Inferior Myocardial Infarction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Braunwald E (1996) Heart disease, fifth edition,WB Saunders Company, Philadelphia, pp 1250–1253Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Opolski G, Kraska T, et al (1986) The effect of infarct size on atrioventricular and intranventricular conduction disturbances in acute myocardial infarction. Int J Cardiol 10: 141–147PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Constans R, Marco J, et al (1979) Devenir des infarctus du myocarde compliqués en phase aigüe de troubles de la conduction. Arch Mal Coeur 72: 957–962PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lamas GA, Muller JE, Zoltan G, et al (1986) A simplified method to predict occurrence of complete heart block during acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 57: 1213–1219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maggioni AP, Franzosi MG, et al (1993) Incidence and prognostic significance of complete atrio-ventricular clock in 11 483 patients treated with perfusion therapy after acute myocardial infarction in the GISSI-2 trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 21: 87AGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Streptochinasi nell’Infarto miocardico (GISSI) (1986) Effectiveness of intravenous thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1: 397–401Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Soppravvivenza nell’Infarto miocardico: GISSI-2 (1990) A factorial randomised trial of alteplase vs streptokinase and heparin vs no heparin among 12 490 patients with acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 336: 65–71Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mauri F, Mafrici A, Oliva F (1993) Significato prognostico dell’ECG standard e delle sue modificazioni nelle prime ore di decorso dell’infarto miocardico acuto. In: Cardiologia. Ed Librex, Milano, pp 318–25Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zehender M, Kasp’er W, et al (1993) Right ventricular infarction as an independent predictor of prognosis after acute inferior myocardial infarction. New Engl J Med 328: 981–988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    The GUSTO investigators (1993) An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial infarction. New Engl J Med 329: 673–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    ISIS-4 (1995) A randomized factorial trial assessing early oral captopril, oral mononitrate, and intravenous megnesium sulphate in 58 050 patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 345: 669–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mavric Z, Zaputavic L, Matana A et al (1990) Prognostic significance of complete atrioventricular block in patients with acute inferior myocardial infarction with and without right ventricular involvement. Am Heart J 119: 823–828PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bassan R, Gamarski R et al (1993) AV block and ventricular infarction: a poorly recognized association in acute inferior myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 21: 87AGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Peterson ED, Hathway WR, Zabel M et al (1996) Prognostic significance of precordial ST segment depression during inferior myocardial infarction in the thrombolytic era: results in 16 521 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 28: 305–312PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Silvani S, Berti S, Coccolini S (1996) Effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy on conduction disturbances in acute myocardial infarction: final report on three studies. Cardiostim Eur J CPE 6: 297Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hindman MC, Wagner GS, Jaro M et al (1978) The clinical significance of bundle branch block complicating acute myocardial infarction. 1 Clinical characteristics, hospital mortality and one-year follow-up. Circulation 58: 679–688PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    ISIS-2 (second International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative group (1988) Randomized trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither among 17 187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-2. J Am Coll Cardiol 12: 3A - 13ACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    ISIS 3 (third International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative group (1992) A randomized comparison of streptokinase vs tissue plasminogen activator vs anitreplase and of aspirin plus heparin vs aspirin alone among 41 299 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 339: 753–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hauer RNW, Lie KT, Liem KL, Durrer D (1982) Long term prognosis in patients with bundle branch block complicating acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 49: 1581–1585PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fibrinolytic Therapy Trialist (FTT) collaborative group (1994) Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction: collaborative overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomized trials of more than 1000 patients. Lancet 343: 311–322Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Laji K, Wilkinson P et al (1995) Prognosis in acute myocardial infarction: comparison of patients with diagnostic and non diagnostic electrocardiograms. Am Heart J 130: 705–710PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hands ME, Cook EF et al (1988) Electrocardiographic diagnosis of myocardial infarction in the presence of complete left bundle branch block. Am Heart J 116: 23–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stark KS, Krucoff MW et al (1991) Quantification of ST-segment changes during coronaryangioplasty in patients with left bundle branch block. Am J Cardiol 67: 1219–1222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sgarbossa EB, Pinski SL et al (1996) Electrocardiographic diagnosis of evolving acute myocardial infarction in the presence of left bundle branch block. New Engl J Med 334: 481–487PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sgarbossa EB (1996) Recent advances in the electrocardiographic diagnosis of myocardial infarction: left bundle branch block and pacing. PACE 19: 1370–1379PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Piccolo
    • 1
  • G. Zuin
    • 1
  1. 1.Divisione di CardiologiaOspedale Umberto IMestre, VeniceItaly

Personalised recommendations