Prevention of sudden death in survivors of myocardial infarction: a decision analysis approach

Utility of current risk stratification tests for predicting major arrhythmic events after myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVES

We surveyed the literature to estimate prediction values for five common tests for risk of major arrhythmic events (MAEs) after myocardial infarction. We then determined feasibility of a staged risk stratification using combinations of noninvasive tests, reserving an electrophysiologic study (EPS) as the final test.

BACKGROUND

Improved approaches are needed for identifying those patients at highest risk for subsequent MAE and candidates for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

METHODS

We located 44 reports for which values of MAE incidence and predictive accuracy could be inferred: signal-averaged electrocardiography; heart rate variability; severe ventricular arrhythmia on ambulatory electrocardiography; left ventricular ejection fraction; and EPS. A meta-analysis of reports used receiver-operating characteristic curves to estimate mean values for sensitivity and specificity for each test and 95% confidence limits. We then simulated a clinical situation in which risk was estimated by combining tests in three stages.

RESULTS

Test sensitivities ranged from 42.8% to 62.4%; specificities from 77.4% to 85.8%. A three-stage stratification yielded a low-risk group (80.0% with a two-year MAE risk of 2.9%), a high-risk group (11.8% with a 41.4% risk) and an unstratified group (8.2% with an 8.9% risk equivalent to a two-year incidence of 7.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Sensitivities and specificities for the five tests were relatively similar. No one test was satisfactory alone for predicting risk. Combinations of tests in stages allowed us to stratify 91.8% of patients as either high-risk or low-risk. These data suggest that a large prospective study to develop a robust prediction model is feasible and desirable.

Programmed ventricular stimulation after myocardial infarction does not help reduce the risk of ventricular events

Programmed ventricular stimulation could be a useful technique to detect patients at high risk for ventricular arrhythmias and sudden death after acute myocardial infarction. However, prevention of arrhythmic events using this technique has never been demonstrated. To determine whether prophylactic antiarrhythmic therapy influences prognosis after acute myocardial infarction, 196 patients without spontaneous ventricular tachycardia (VT) but with inducible sustained monomorphic VT were followed for 3 +/- 1 years. Ninety-seven patients were not treated (control group). In 99 patients (study group), the antiarrhythmic therapy was guided by electrophysiologic study: One to four trials using class I, II, and III antiarrhythmic drugs were performed until the VT was not inducible or the induced VT was slower and was associated with hemodynamic stability. An effective antiarrhythmic drug prevented VT induction in 34 patients (34%; group I). Sixty-five patients (group II) still had inducible VT with the antiarrhythmic drug. Group II differed from group I in having a higher incidence of an inferior myocardial infarction location (57% vs. 47%; NS), a lower left ventricular ejection fraction (36.5% vs. 41%; NS), a slower rate of induced VT in the control state (227 vs. 255 beats/min; p < 0.05), and a higher number of drug trials (1.9 vs 1.3; p < 0.001). During the follow-up in the control group and in groups I and II, the incidence of total cardiac events was 25%, 15%, and 16% (NS), respectively, and the incidence of total arrhythmic events (VT, sudden death) was 18.5%, 9%, and 12% (NS). Only the risk of VT was reduced (14%, 0%, and 4%; p < 0.05). In conclusion, guided-antiarrhythmic therapy, including class III agents after acute myocardial infarction, was successful in only 34% of patients, and the incidence of arrhythmic events was not significantly decreased. Therefore, programmed ventricular stimulation does not help in managing patients at risk of ventricular arrhythmia after myocardial infarction but could help indicate the need for nonmedical treatment, such as device therapy.

Decision analysis in surgery

BACKGROUND

The technique of decision analysis is often applied to clinical policy and economic issues in surgery. Because surgeons may be unfamiliar with such work, this article catalogues decision analysis studies in the surgical specialties.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical literature (1966 to 1994) to identify surgical decision analysis studies and to assess trends over time. Each article was categorized according to the type of journal (surgical, other clinical, or technical) in which it was published and content, including surgical specialty, clinical topic, article focus (individual patient decision making, clinical policy, or cost-effectiveness), and primary findings.

RESULTS

Publication rates of surgical decision analysis have increased dramatically over time. Of the 86 total studies only six were published before 1980. In contrast, 44 studies appeared between 1990 and 1994. Although 77% were published in nonsurgical journals, decision analyses have begun to appear more regularly in surgical forums. Studies addressing all of the surgical specialties were found, although more than one half addressed topics in general surgery (34%) or cardiothoracic surgery (22%). The most frequent topics were gallstones (11 articles), head and neck cancer (five articles), coronary artery disease (four articles), and cerebral arteriovenous malformations (four articles). Articles focusing on clinical policy (i.e., those assessing surgical efficacy for broad groups of patients) now account for large majority of published decision analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of decision analysis in surgery is growing steadily. Because decision analysis is being used to influence clinical policy, it is important for surgeons to be aware of these studies and to be able to review them critically.

Syncope in advanced heart failure: high risk of sudden death regardless of origin of syncope

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess the importance of syncope as a warning sign for sudden death in advanced heart failure and to determine the relative importance of cardiac syncope and syncope from other causes.

BACKGROUND

Despite remarkable advances in the pharmacologic approach to advanced heart failure, 20% to 40% of patients with advanced heart failure will die each year. In such patients, the relation between sudden death and the etiology of syncope has not been evaluated.

METHODS

The relation of syncope to sudden death was evaluated in 491 consecutive patients with advanced heart failure (New York Heart Association functional class III or IV), no history of cardiac arrest and a mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 0.20 +/- 0.07. Patients were evaluated for the presence and origin of syncope. The severity of heart failure was assessed from serum sodium levels, ejection fraction, functional class and echocardiographic and hemodynamic variables.

RESULTS

Sixty patients (12%) had a history of syncope; the condition had a cardiac origin in 29 (48%) and was due to other causes in 31 (52%). The origin of heart failure was coronary artery disease in 234 patients (48%) and dilated cardiomyopathy in 253 (51%) and its severity was similar in patients with and without syncope. During a mean follow-up interval of 365 +/- 419 days, 69 patients (14%) died suddenly and 66 patients (13%) died of progressive heart failure. The actuarial incidence of sudden death by 1 year was significantly greater in patients with (45%) than in those without (12%, p < 0.00001) syncope. In the Cox proportional hazards model, syncope predicted sudden death independent of atrial fibrillation, serum sodium, cardiac index, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition and patient age. The actuarial risk of sudden death by 1 year was similarly high in patients with either cardiac syncope or syncope from other causes (49% vs. 39%, p = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with advanced heart failure are at especially high risk for sudden death regardless of the etiology of syncope.