Impact of quantitative ST-T analysis in patients with suspected myocardial infarction presenting with right bundle branch block.
ECG
ST-segment
STEMI
right bundle branch block
Journal
The American journal of medicine
ISSN: 1555-7162
Titre abrégé: Am J Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0267200
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 Apr 2024
24 Apr 2024
Historique:
received:
24
03
2024
revised:
16
04
2024
accepted:
16
04
2024
medline:
27
4
2024
pubmed:
27
4
2024
entrez:
26
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
While left bundle branch block (LBBB) is a well-known risk feature in patients with acute myocardial infarction and a rapid invasive management is recommended, data supporting this strategy for patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB) is less robust. In total, 2,139 patients with suspected ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were triaged to acute coronary angiography based on a prehospital 12-lead ECG. Sensitivity and specificity for STEMI-ECG-criteria were compared in RBBB and non-BBB patients. Adjusted hazard ratios for 1-year overall mortality were computed. STEMI was adjudicated in 1,832/2,139 (85.6%) of all patients and in 102/117 (87.2%) of RBBB patients. ST-segment deviation followed typical ST-T patterns in most RBBB patients. Out of 17 RBBB patients without significant ST-changes STEMI was adjudicated in 14 (82%). Diagnostic accuracy of STEMI-criteria was comparable in RBBB and non-RBBB patients for inferior (sensitivity: 51.1% vs 59.1%, p=0.14; specificity: 66.7% vs 52.1%, p=0.33) and anterior STEMI (sensitivity: 35.2% vs 36.6%, p=0.80; specificity: 58.3% vs 49.5%, p=0.55). Diagnostic performance was lower for lateral STEMI in RBBB patients (sensitivity: 14.8% vs 4.4%, p=0.001; specificity: 75.0% vs 98.4%, p<0.001). Patients with RBBB had higher 1-year mortality compared to non-BBB patients (hazard ratio 2.3% (95% CI 1.25-4.21). ECG-criteria used for detection of STEMI showed comparable diagnostic accuracy in RBBB and non-BBB patients. However, STEMI was frequently present in RBBB patients not fulfilling diagnostic ECG-criteria. RBBB-patients showed poorer outcome after 1 year. Consequently, the presence of RBBB in suspected STEMI cases signifies a high-risk feature, aligning with established guidelines.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
While left bundle branch block (LBBB) is a well-known risk feature in patients with acute myocardial infarction and a rapid invasive management is recommended, data supporting this strategy for patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB) is less robust.
METHODS
METHODS
In total, 2,139 patients with suspected ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were triaged to acute coronary angiography based on a prehospital 12-lead ECG. Sensitivity and specificity for STEMI-ECG-criteria were compared in RBBB and non-BBB patients. Adjusted hazard ratios for 1-year overall mortality were computed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
STEMI was adjudicated in 1,832/2,139 (85.6%) of all patients and in 102/117 (87.2%) of RBBB patients. ST-segment deviation followed typical ST-T patterns in most RBBB patients. Out of 17 RBBB patients without significant ST-changes STEMI was adjudicated in 14 (82%). Diagnostic accuracy of STEMI-criteria was comparable in RBBB and non-RBBB patients for inferior (sensitivity: 51.1% vs 59.1%, p=0.14; specificity: 66.7% vs 52.1%, p=0.33) and anterior STEMI (sensitivity: 35.2% vs 36.6%, p=0.80; specificity: 58.3% vs 49.5%, p=0.55). Diagnostic performance was lower for lateral STEMI in RBBB patients (sensitivity: 14.8% vs 4.4%, p=0.001; specificity: 75.0% vs 98.4%, p<0.001). Patients with RBBB had higher 1-year mortality compared to non-BBB patients (hazard ratio 2.3% (95% CI 1.25-4.21).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
ECG-criteria used for detection of STEMI showed comparable diagnostic accuracy in RBBB and non-BBB patients. However, STEMI was frequently present in RBBB patients not fulfilling diagnostic ECG-criteria. RBBB-patients showed poorer outcome after 1 year. Consequently, the presence of RBBB in suspected STEMI cases signifies a high-risk feature, aligning with established guidelines.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38670517
pii: S0002-9343(24)00244-4
doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2024.04.021
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.