Risk stratification following acute myocardial infarction

Citation
V. Hombach et al., Risk stratification following acute myocardial infarction, Z KARDIOL, 89, 2000, pp. 75-86
Citations number
65
Categorie Soggetti
Cardiovascular & Respiratory Systems","Cardiovascular & Hematology Research
Journal title
ZEITSCHRIFT FUR KARDIOLOGIE
ISSN journal
03005860 → ACNP
Volume
89
Year of publication
2000
Supplement
3
Pages
75 - 86
Database
ISI
SICI code
0300-5860(2000)89:<75:RSFAMI>2.0.ZU;2-G
Abstract
In industrialized countries the rate of sudden cardiac death remains unchan ged. The most frequently encountered structural heart disease in these pati ents is coronary artery disease. Despite the era of thrombolytic therapy of acute myocardial infarction patients carry an increased risk of sudden car diac arrhythmogenic death within a time period of one to two years followin g the acute event. Therefore, risk stratification post-MI before patient di scharge is furthermore mandatory. The spectrum of non-invasive techniques for risk stratification includes th e clinical risk profile, measurement of left ventricular global function (L V ejection fraction), the resting ECG (QT dispersion), an ECG stress test ( detection and severity of myocardial ischemia), ambulatory ECG monitoring ( number and type of ventricular arrhythmias), surface high resolution ECG (d etection of ventricular late potentials), measurement of T wave alternans ( TWA, alternans ratio), and measurements of the activity and balance of the autonomous nervous system (heart rate variability, baroreflex sensitivity = BRS). Programmed ventricular stimulation (PVS) serves as an invasive risk stratification technique (detection of an arrhythmogenic substrate). The prognostic power of the noninvasive techniques is limited; in general, the prognostic value of a negative test is reasonably high (90 to 100 % dep ending on the test used), whereas the prognostic value of a positive test i s rather low (4 to 42 % depending on the test used). Combining several non- invasive tests may significantly improve the positive predictive value abov e 50 %, but this goes along with a significant decreases of sensitivity bel ow 50 %. Therefore, a combination of several non-invasive tests (detection and exclusion of a large number of low-risk individuals) with the invasive method of PVS (detection of an arrhythmogenic substrate, i.e, a high-risk p atient) seems reasonable, as has been convincingly shown by several smaller prognostic studies.