Abstract
Background /Aim: Studies of patients with myocardial infarction and Bundle branch block have reported high mortality rate and poor prognosis. To document the frequency of Bundle branch block and their influence on prognosis in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Patients & Methods: This is case –control study of 42 patients with acute myocardial infarction and bundle branch block (case subject) and 42 patients with acute myocardial infarction and with out block (control subject) .Patients admitted to the coronary care unit were searched to identify those with documented acute myocardial infarction complicated by the presence of bundle branch block. Conduction defects were classified as follow: complete left bundle branch block (LBBB); right bundle branch block (RBBB); right bundle and left anterior fascicular block (RBBB+LAFB); right bundle and left posterior fascicular block(RBBB+LPFB). And all patients treated with Thrombolytic therapy (Streptokinase or t-PA tissue –type plasminogen).
Results: In 42 patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by bundle branch block, most common types of block were LBBB (38%) and RBBB+LAFB (33.4%).
Patients with RBBB + LPFB had a higher mortality than patients with other intra ventricular conduction defect (42% VS 26%,p<0.025). Hospital mortality was directly related to the degree of heart failure only ,(8%) of patients with class I-II heart failure died, compared to (47%) of Patients with class III-IV heart failure (p < 0.001). The hospital mortality were higher in patients with bundle branch block than in those without block . (26 % VS. 12% p>0.001).
Conclusion: The occurrence of Bundle branch block in acute myocardial infarction indicate that infarction may be extensive and may result in cardiac failure or death.
Keyword: Electrocardiography (ECG), Myocardial infarction (MI), Left bundle branch block (LBBB), Right bundle branch block (RBBB).
References
1. Coll JJ, Weinberg SL: Incidence and mortality of intraventricular conduction defects in acute myocardial infarction . Am JCardial 29:344,1972
2. Dubois C, Pierard LA, Smeete J-P, Foidart G, Legrand V, Kulbertus HE. Short-and long-term prognostic importance of complete bundle branch block complicating acute myocardial infarction ClinCardiol 1988; 11: 292-6.
3. Godman MJ, Lassers BW, Julian DG,:Complete bundle branch block complicating acute myocardial infarction . N Engl J Med 282: 237, 1970.
4. Gould L, Ramana CV, Gomprecht RF: Left bundle branch block : Prognosis in acute myocardial infarction JAMA 225: 625, 1973 .
5. Hinman MC, Wagner GS, Jaro M, et al. The clinical significance of bundle branch block complicating acute myocardial infarction. I. Clinical characteristics, hospital mortality, and one-year follow-up. Circulation 1978;58: 679-88.
6. Hunt D, Sloman G: Bundle branch block in acute myocardial infarction .Br Med J 1;85, 1968.
7. Killip T III. Kimball JT: Treatment of myocardial infarction in a coronary care unit :a tow year experience with 250 patients Am J Cardiol 20: 457, 1967.
8. Lichsten E, Gupta PK, Chadda KD, Liu HM, Sayeed M:Finding of prognostic value in patients with incomplete bilateral bundle branch block complicat-ing acute myocardial infarction . Am J Cardiol 32:913, 1973
9. Lie KI, Wellens HJ, Schuienberg RG, Becker AE, Durrer D. Factors influencing prognosis of bundle branch block complicating acute antero-septal infraction: the value of His bundle recordings.Circulation 1974; 50: 935-41
10. Moss AJ: Introduction. Symposium on the prehospital phase of acute myocardial infarction Arch Intern Med 129: 713, 1972
11. Mullins CB, Atkins JM: Prognosis and management of ventricular conduction block in acute myocardial infarction ,Mod Cone Cardiovasc Dis 45: 129, 1976
12. Nimetz AA, Shbrooks SJ, Hutter AM, Desanctis RW :The significance of bndle branch block during acut myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 90: 439, 1975.
13. Rizzon P, Di BiaseM,Baisss C: Intraventricular conduction defects in acute myocardial infarction. Br Heart J 36:660, 1974
14. Roos JC, Dunning AJ: Right bundle branch block and left axis deviation in acute myocardial infarction .Br Heart J 32: 847,1970
15. Rosenbaum MB. The hemi block, diagno-stic criteria and clinical significance. Mod Concept Cardiovasc Dis 1970; 39:141-6.
16. Scheidt S, Killip T. Bundle branch block complicating acute myocardial infarction .JAMA 222:919, 1972
17. Sgarbossa EB, Pinski SL, Barbagelata A, Underwood DA, Gates KB,Topol EJ et al, for the GUSTO-1(Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen activator for occluded Coronary Arteries) Investigators Electro Cardiographic diagn-osis of acute myocardial infarction in the presence of left bundle branch block .M Engl J Med 1996; 334:481-7
18. Thygesen K, Alpert JS , White HD. Universal definition of myocardial infa-rction. JA Coll Cardiol 2007;50:2173 – 95.
19. Willems JL, Robles DE, Medina EO, Bernard R, Coumel P, Fisch C,Krikler D, etal. Criteria for intraventricular conduction disturbance and pre- excita-tion. World Health Organization/ International Society and Federation for Cardiology Task Force Ad Hoc.J Am CollCardiol 1985; 5: 1261- 1275.
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v5i3.207
