• Margit Strauss, Anselm Kai Gitt, Torsten Becker, Thomas Kleemann, Rudolf Schiele, Harald Darius, Claus Jünger, Jochen Senges, Karlheinz Seidl, and MITRA Plus Study Group.
• Herzzentrum Ludwigshafen, Bremserstrasse 79, 67063 Ludwigshafen, Germany. maggie-ma@t-online.de
• Clin Res Cardiol. 2008 Oct 1;97(10):748-52.

BackgroundAccording to the current guidelines for acute myocardial infarction, ventricular fibrillation during the acute phase of myocardial infarction is no indication for specific treatment like ICD implantation. Primary objective of our study was to evaluate the prognostic significance of cardiac arrest within the acute phase of myocardial infarction in patients with moderately reduced left ventricular function.Methods And ResultsFrom 1994 until 2004, we included 7111 patients with acute STEMI and an LVEF >30% from the MITRA plus registry who were discharged alive from hospital and had a complete follow up. We compared long term prognosis on total mortality in patients with and without prehospital cardiac arrest. 286 out of 7111 patients (4%) with moderately reduced LVEF >30% after STEMI had prehospital cardiac arrest and were discharged alive from hospital. In these patients, total mortality during a mean follow up of 13 months was 13.6% compared to 8.7% in patients without cardiac arrest, although patients with cardiac arrest were younger and had less risk factors. Higher mortality after cardiac arrest was independent from gender, risk factors and medical treatment. Only in patients with preserved LVEF >55% after STEMI, mortality was equal in patients with and without cardiac arrest.ConclusionPrehospital cardiac arrest in the acute phase of STEMI is an independent risk indicator for higher mortality in patients with moderately reduced left ventricular function (LVEF 30-55%). To evaluate the prognostic impact of the implantation of an ICD in these patients, further investigation is needed.

26 keywords...

hide…