Circulation, Vol 62, 20-28, Copyright © 1980 by American Heart Association
MM Scheinman, P Remedios, MD Cheitlin, RW Peters, N Holford, J Desai and JA Abbott
Three hundred fifty-eight of 429 (83%) consecutive patients with acute
myocardial infarction (MI) and a normal PR interval received various
antiarrhythmic drugs (AD), including lidocaine and/or procainamide,
quinidine, digoxin, propranolol or disopyramide. There was no significant
difference in the incidence of progression to any degree of
atrioventricular (AV) block or to higher degrees of AV block (Mobitz II or
third-degree AV block) between those treated and not treated with AD: 38 of
358 (11%) and six of 358 (1.7%) with AD vs 11 of 71 (15%) and two of 71
(2.8%) in the untreated group, respectively. Similarly, there was no
significant difference in progression between treated and untreated
patients with anterior MI, 14 of 144 (10%) vs five of 32 (16%); inferior
MI, 21 of 111 (19%) vs five of 26 (19%), or subendocardial MI, three of 103
(3%) vs one of 12 (8%). Bundle branch block (BBB) (without AV block) was
initially present in 89 of 249 (21%). The incidence of AV block (seven of
24, 30%) was higher in treated patients with newly acquired BBB (27
patients) than in the untreated patients (none of three, p less than 0.05).
The commonly used ADs did not adversely affect AV conduction in patients
with acute MI with narrow QRS and either normal, first-degree, or Mobitz I
AV block. Moreover, no subset of patients grouped by infarct location,
specific AD used, or BBB (except perhaps for those with newly acquired BBB)
appeared to be at risk of development of AV block during AD therapy.
ARTICLES
Effects of antiarrhythmic drugs on atrioventricular conduction in patients with acute myocardial infarction
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1980 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |