Key result
Programmed electrical stimulation did not identify high-risk patients post-MI, as 0% of patients with induced ventricular tachycardia died during follow-up compared to 9.2% without induced VT.
Why the study?
Does programmed electrical stimulation identify patients at risk of sudden death post-myocardial infarction?
Cohort (n=84)
Does programmed electrical stimulation identify patients at risk of sudden death post-myocardial infarction?
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs 9.2%
Programmed electrical stimulation did not identify high-risk patients post-MI, whereas poor ventricular function (LVEF <40%) and complex ventricular arrhythmias on Holter were associated with mortality.
Programmed stimulation should not guide post-MI risk stratification; leaves open whether LVEF or Holter findings warrant prospective validation.
Programmed electrical stimulation (PES) of the heart was evaluated as a method of identifying patients at risk of sudden death post-myocardial infarction (post-MI). Eighty-four patients (mean age, 56 +/- 10 years) underwent PES 6 to 8 weeks post-MI. PES was performed at the right ventricular apex at twice diastolic threshold. Prior to stimulation patients were studied with exercise stress testing, 24-hour Holter monitoring and radionuclide ejection fraction. The patients were placed into two groups, according to their responses to electrical stimulation. Group 1:65 patients in whom no arrhythmias were induced or who had repetitive responses that lasted less than six cycles; Group 2:19 patients in whom ventricular tachycardia was induced. At the end of follow-up (20 +/- 9 months) six patients from Group 1 had died. Complex ventricular ectopy and ventricular tachycardia were more frequently detected on Holter in Group 2 (9/19) than in Group 1 (14/65) (p less than 0.03). The results of exercise testing and radionuclide ejection fraction did not correlate with the response to PES. However all but one of the patients who died had a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) under 40% and four out of six patients had ventricular tachycardia on Holter monitor. We draw the conclusion that PES did not contribute to the identification of high-risk patients post-MI, as none of the 19 patients in whom ventricular tachycardia was induced died during follow-up. In addition, high-risk patients were characterized by poor ventricular function and complex ventricular arrhythmias on Holter recording.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gonzalez et al. (1988) conducted a cohort in post-myocardial infarction (n=84). Programmed electrical stimulation (PES) vs. No arrhythmias induced or repetitive responses <6 cycles was evaluated on Death. Programmed electrical stimulation did not identify high-risk patients post-MI, as 0% of patients with induced ventricular tachycardia died during follow-up compared to 9.2% without induced VT.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: