4.1 Article

Comparison of clinical characteristics and outcomes in patients with left bundle branch block versus ST-elevation myocardial infarction referred for primary percutaneous coronary intervention

期刊

CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE
卷 26, 期 1, 页码 17-21

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MCA.0000000000000156

关键词

ECG; left bundle branch block; primary percutaneous coronary intervention; ST-elevation myocardial infarction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims Recent studies have suggested that a low proportion of patients presenting with left bundle branch block (LBBB) require emergency intervention. In this study, we have compared baseline clinical characteristics, angiographic findings and subsequent outcomes in patients with LBBB versus ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) referred to our tertiary centre for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods and results A large retrospective observational study was performed involving 1875 consecutive patients presenting to our single tertiary cardiac centre for primary PCI over a 27-month period. Patients presenting with LBBB (n = 155, 8.3%) were significantly older (P<0.0001) and were more likely to be female (P<0.0001) and have a prior history of myocardial infarction (P<0.0001) or coronary artery bypass graft surgery (P = 0.005). Rates of acute occlusion (12.2 vs. 63%; P<0.0001) and PCI (26 vs. 83%; P<0.0001) were significantly lower in LBBB patients compared with STEMI patients. Although the 30-day mortality was similar, overall mortality during the 2 years of follow-up was significantly higher in the LBBB group compared with the STEMI group (27.8 vs. 13.9%; P = 0.023). Conclusion The incidence of an acutely occluded vessel is low in LBBB when compared with STEMI, but the long-term outcome is significantly worse. Patients with LBBB referred for primary PCI need better risk stratification, and further work is needed to identify potential diagnostic and management strategies. Coron Artery Dis 26:17-21 (C) 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health vertical bar Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据