Why the study?
Does the need for temporary transvenous cardiac pacing predict increased mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Does the need for temporary transvenous cardiac pacing predict increased mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
The requirement for a temporary pacemaker in patients with acute myocardial infarction is infrequent in the current interventional era but predicts a significantly higher mortality rate, warranting intensive monitoring.
Temporary pacing need in AMI was associated with higher mortality; leaves open whether it marks sicker patients or warrants intensified monitoring.
BACKGROUND: Temporary pacemakers (TP) are used in emergency situations for severe bradyarrhythmias secondary to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and to non-AMI related cardiac disorders. TP have been studied previously in AMI patients treated with thrombolytic therapy; limited information is available on current outcomes in AMI patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: We reviewed the indications, complications, and mortality associated with TP insertion over a four year period (2003 - 2007) at a university hospital. RESULTS: Seventy-three temporary pacemakers were inserted (47 men, 26 women) during this period. The mean age was 65.2 years. TP were used in 29 AMI patients (39.7 % of total) and 44 non-AMI patients (60.3% of total). The duration of TP use was 2.6 ± 0.4 days in the whole cohort, 2.46 % of all AMI patients (29/1180) admitted during this period required a TP. Six of these patients requiring a TP required a permanent pacemaker. Eight patients with AMI and a TP died (27.6%). In contrast 8.9 % of AMI patients not requiring a TP died (P < 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences between the AMI and non-AMI groups in the duration of temporary pacing (2.4 ± 0.6 days vs. 2.8 ± 0.4 days), in complications (27.6% vs. 29.5%), or in mortality (27.6% vs. 15.9%). The need for a permanent pacemaker (PPM) differed significantly between the AMI and non-AMI patients (20.7% vs. 54.5%; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that AMI patients infrequently require a TP and that approximately 20% of these patients require a PPM. These results suggest that early revascularization of the conduction system with current interventional techniques has decreased the need for TP in AMI patients. However, this group requires more intensive monitoring as the mortality rate in this group of patients is significantly higher than the other AMI patients not requiring TP.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yasir Yaqub (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: