Right bundle branch block in suspected acute coronary syndromes: Diagnostic challenges, treatment and prognosis

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Juliana Senftinger MD , Nils A. Sörensen MD , Stefan Blankenberg MD, DMSc , Peter Clemmensen MD, DMSc
{"title":"Right bundle branch block in suspected acute coronary syndromes: Diagnostic challenges, treatment and prognosis","authors":"Juliana Senftinger MD ,&nbsp;Nils A. Sörensen MD ,&nbsp;Stefan Blankenberg MD, DMSc ,&nbsp;Peter Clemmensen MD, DMSc","doi":"10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2024.153824","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>There is still conflicting evidence regarding the prognostic implications of right bundle branch block (RBBB) in the general population but also in patients with heart diseases like acute coronary syndromes (ACS). In accordance with current guidelines, RBBB in ACS patients is considered as STEMI equivalent. However, recent studies indicate that further differentiation is necessary in this group, as we will outline below.</div></div><div><h3>Methods and results</h3><div>A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar.</div><div>In previous studies, RBBB in the general population were mostly considered benign changes of the electrical conduction system. However, recent studies indicate that both complete and incomplete RBBB are associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In addition, among unselected patients with suspected ACS presenting to the emergency department, the prevalence of RBBB was 3 % and it was associated with elevated mortality. The subsequent angiographic identification of a culprit coronary artery stenosis leading to stent implantation was similar at approximately 2 % regardless of the initial ECG presentation with narrow QRS complexes, left bundle branch block (LBBB), or RBBB.</div><div>Finally, in a group of high-risk patients for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the prevalence of RBBB was 12 %. While RBBB was associated with poor outcome compared to non-BBB and LBBB patients, diagnostic accuracy of STEMI criteria was not affected by the presence of RBBB. However, RBBB patients without distinct STEMI signs in ECG often showed acute STEMI on angiography indicating a potential benefit from immediate transfer to the cardiac catheterization laboratory.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In the general population, patients with RBBB and risk factors may need further evaluation. Regarding ACS patients, recent studies support current guidelines that recommend acute invasive evaluation for high-risk ACS patients with RBBB, regardless of ST-T deviations. However, in an unselected group of ACS patients, differential diagnoses should also be investigated through additional diagnostic procedures.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15606,"journal":{"name":"Journal of electrocardiology","volume":"87 ","pages":"Article 153824"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of electrocardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022073624002942","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

There is still conflicting evidence regarding the prognostic implications of right bundle branch block (RBBB) in the general population but also in patients with heart diseases like acute coronary syndromes (ACS). In accordance with current guidelines, RBBB in ACS patients is considered as STEMI equivalent. However, recent studies indicate that further differentiation is necessary in this group, as we will outline below.

Methods and results

A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar.
In previous studies, RBBB in the general population were mostly considered benign changes of the electrical conduction system. However, recent studies indicate that both complete and incomplete RBBB are associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In addition, among unselected patients with suspected ACS presenting to the emergency department, the prevalence of RBBB was 3 % and it was associated with elevated mortality. The subsequent angiographic identification of a culprit coronary artery stenosis leading to stent implantation was similar at approximately 2 % regardless of the initial ECG presentation with narrow QRS complexes, left bundle branch block (LBBB), or RBBB.
Finally, in a group of high-risk patients for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the prevalence of RBBB was 12 %. While RBBB was associated with poor outcome compared to non-BBB and LBBB patients, diagnostic accuracy of STEMI criteria was not affected by the presence of RBBB. However, RBBB patients without distinct STEMI signs in ECG often showed acute STEMI on angiography indicating a potential benefit from immediate transfer to the cardiac catheterization laboratory.

Conclusion

In the general population, patients with RBBB and risk factors may need further evaluation. Regarding ACS patients, recent studies support current guidelines that recommend acute invasive evaluation for high-risk ACS patients with RBBB, regardless of ST-T deviations. However, in an unselected group of ACS patients, differential diagnoses should also be investigated through additional diagnostic procedures.
疑似急性冠状动脉综合征的右束支传导阻滞:诊断挑战、治疗和预后。
背景:关于右束支传导阻滞(RBBB)对普通人群以及急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)等心脏病患者预后的影响,目前仍存在相互矛盾的证据。根据现行指南,急性冠状动脉综合征患者的 RBBB 被认为与 STEMI 相当。然而,最近的研究表明,有必要对这一群体作进一步区分,我们将在下文中概述:我们在 PubMed 和 Google Scholar 上进行了文献检索。在以前的研究中,一般人群中的 RBBB 大多被认为是电传导系统的良性变化。然而,最近的研究表明,完全性和不完全性 RBBB 均与心血管发病率和死亡率的增加有关。此外,在急诊科就诊的未经选择的疑似 ACS 患者中,RBBB 的发病率为 3%,且与死亡率升高有关。无论最初的心电图表现为窄QRS波群、左束支传导阻滞(LBBB)还是RBBB,随后经血管造影检查发现冠状动脉狭窄并导致支架植入的比例都差不多,约为2%。最后,在一组 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)的高危患者中,RBBB 的发生率为 12%。虽然与非RBBB和LBBB患者相比,RBBB与不良预后有关,但STEMI标准的诊断准确性不受RBBB存在的影响。然而,在心电图中没有明显STEMI体征的RBBB患者往往在血管造影中显示为急性STEMI,这表明立即转入心导管室可能会有好处:结论:在普通人群中,具有 RBBB 和危险因素的患者可能需要进一步评估。关于 ACS 患者,最近的研究支持目前的指南,即建议对有 RBBB 的高危 ACS 患者进行急性侵入性评估,无论 ST-T 是否偏离。然而,在未经选择的 ACS 患者群体中,也应通过其他诊断程序对鉴别诊断进行调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of electrocardiology
Journal of electrocardiology 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
152
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Electrocardiology is devoted exclusively to clinical and experimental studies of the electrical activities of the heart. It seeks to contribute significantly to the accuracy of diagnosis and prognosis and the effective treatment, prevention, or delay of heart disease. Editorial contents include electrocardiography, vectorcardiography, arrhythmias, membrane action potential, cardiac pacing, monitoring defibrillation, instrumentation, drug effects, and computer applications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信