Prevalence, Temporal Evolution, and Impact on Survival of Ventricular Conduction Blocks in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Cardiogenic Shock

Bundle branch block and nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay prevalence using Chinese nationwide survey data

Objective

We aimed to determine the prevalence of and the factors associated with intraventricular conduction disturbance in the Chinese population.

Methods

Electrocardiographic data from 42,031 people were retrospectively analysed. The weighted prevalences of left bundle branch block (LBBB), right bundle branch block (RBBB), bifascicular block and nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay (NS-IVCD) were calculated. The independently associated factors were determined using logistic regression analysis.

Results

The weighted prevalence for Chinese people older than 45 years was 0.17% for LBBB, 2.16% for RBBB and 0.44% for NS-IVCD. The weighted prevalence for RBBB combined with left anterior fascicular block was 0.17%, and 0.05% for RBBB combined with left posterior fascicular block. There were significant differences in the weighted prevalences of RBBB and NS-IVCD between men and women. The weighted prevalence of LBBB and RBBB increased markedly with increasing age. Age and diabetes were independent factors associated with LBBB, compared with age and sex for RBBB and sex and coronary artery disease for NS-IVCD.

Conclusions

This study provided reliable data for the weighted prevalence of and factors associated with LBBB, RBBB and NS-IVCD in Chinese adults.

The Relationship of Conduction Disorder and Prognosis in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Conduction disorders with a widened QRS are associated with poor prognosis in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Conduction disorders include left bundle branch block (LBBB), right bundle branch block (RBBB), and nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay (NICD). Previous studies did not have conflicting results regarding the type of bundle branch block (BBB) with the worst prognosis, and few studies have focused on the prognosis of patients with NICD.

METHODS

Patients with ACS were enrolled between January 2005 and December 2019, and their medical history (International Classification of Diseases codes) was obtained from the Chang Gung Research Database. Age, sex, comorbidities, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and drug use were compared between the patients with and without conduction disorders. The following clinical outcomes were compared between patients with and without conduction disorders: heart failure (HF) hospitalization, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, and all-cause mortality. After propensity score matching, the Kaplan-Meier curve analysis for HF hospitalization, CV mortality, and all-cause mortality were compared among patients with LBBB, RBBB, and NICD.

RESULTS

This study enrolled a total of 33970 participants and involved 3392 and 30578 patients with and without conduction disorders, respectively. Older age and a higher prevalence of comorbidities were noted in patients with conduction disorders. Lower mean LVEF was exhibited in the patients with conduction disorders (with vs. without; 44.64 ± 20.73% vs. 49.85 ± 20.63%; p < 0.001). During the 3-year follow-up period, higher incidences of HF hospitalization (21.55% vs. 17.51%; p < 0.001), CV mortality (17.98% vs. 12.14%; p < 0.001), and all-cause mortality (38.86% vs. 31.15%; p < 0.001) were noted in the patients with conduction disorder. After ACS events, 10.0% of patients presented with conduction disorders, with LBBB in 3.3%, RBBB in 6.0%, and NICD in 0.7%. The lowest mean of LVEF was presented in the patients with NICD (LBBB vs. RBBB vs. NICD; 41.00 ± 19.47% vs. 47.73 ± 20.82% vs. 34.57 ± 20.02%; p < 0.001). Among the three groups, the highest incidence of HF hospitalization was noted in patients with LBBB after propensity score matching. The lowest incidence of CV and all-cause mortality was observed in patients with RBBB. After adjustment of age, gender, comorbidities, medication, and mean LVEF, those with LBBB had the highest hazard ratio for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) of 1.113 (p=0.029; 95% CI = 1.013-1.266).

CONCLUSIONS

In the ACS population, patients with conduction delay had a poor prognosis due to a higher prevalence of comorbidities and lower mean LVEF. Among the patients with LBBB, RBBB, and NICD, those with LBBB and NICD had a higher incidence of HF hospitalization, CV mortality, and all-cause mortality. Patients with NICD had the lowest mean LVEF compared to those with LBBB and RBBB. Patients with LBBB had a significantly highest HR of MACE.

Serum Lactate and A Relative Change in Lactate as Predictors of Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock - Results from the Cardshock Study

INTRODUCTION

Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction has a very high mortality. Our present study focuses on serial measurement of lactate during admission due to cardiogenic shock and the prognostic effect of lactate and a relative change in lactate in patients after admission and the institution of intensive care treatment.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This is a secondary analysis of the CardShock study. Data on lactate at baseline were available on 217 of 219 patients.In the study population, the median baseline lactate was 2.8 mmol/L (min-max range, 0.5-23.1 mmol/L).At admission, lactate was predictive of 30-day mortality with an adjusted Hazard ratio (HR) of 1.20 mmol/L (95% confidence interval, CI 1.14-1.27). Within the first 24 h of admission, baseline lactate remained predictive of 30-day mortality. Lactate at 6 h had a HR of 1.14 (95% CI 1.06-1.24) and corresponding values at 12 and 24 h had a HR of 1.10 (1.04-1.17), and of HR 1.19 (95% CI 1.07-1.32), respectively. A 50% reduction in lactate within 6 h resulted in a HR of 0.82 (95% CI 0.72-0.94). Corresponding hazard ratios at 12 and 24 h, were 0.87 (95% CI 0.76-0.98) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.60-0.91), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The main findings of the present study are that baseline lactate is a powerful predictor of 30-day mortality, lactate at 6, 12, and 24 h after admission are predictors of 30-day mortality, and a relative change in lactate is a significant predictor of survival within the first 24 h after instituting intensive care treatment adding information beyond the information from baseline values.

Relation of intraventricular conduction delay to risk of new-onset heart failure and structural heart disease in the general population

•

Subjects with high-risk of developing heart failure ought to be identified.

•

Non-specific IVCD and LBBB were associated with risk of new-onset heart failure.

•

LBBB also carried a risk of novel structural heart disease in 15-year follow-up.

•

Their presence should alert clinician even in subjects free of any known heart disease.

•

Right bundle branch block and other blocks were not associated with increased risk.

Background

Intraventricular conduction delays (IVCDs) are hallmarks of heart failure (HF) and structural heart disease (SHD) but their prognostic value for HF and SHD is unclear.

Methods

Relation of eight IVCDs and the incidence of first-time HF or SHD was studied in a nationally representative random sample of 6080 Finnish subjects aged ≥ 30 years (mean age 52.1, SD 14.5 years) who participated in the health examination including 12-lead ECG.

Results

During 16.5 years’ follow up, half of the subjects with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and one third of the subjects with non-specific IVCD developed HF. After controlling for known clinical risk factors the hazard ratio (HR) for new-onset HF for LBBB was 3.29 (95% confidence interval 1.93–5.63, P < 0.001) and 3.53 for non-specific IVCD (1.65–7.55, P = 0.001). In corresponding analysis, LBBB predicted SHD with HR 2.60 (1.21–5.62, P = 0.015). Excluding subjects with history of heart disease, including coronary heart disease, did not have impact on results. Right bundle branch block and other IVCDs displayed no relation to endpoints.

Conclusion

LBBB and non-specific IVCD were associated with more than three-fold risk of new-onset HF. Furthermore, LBBB was associated with novel SHD. Their presence should alert clinician even in subjects free from any known heart disease.