Background: Current approaches to coronary artery disease (CAD) and acute myocardial infarction (MI) may not be well represented in most primary prevention trials of sudden cardiac death (SCD).
Methods: The contemporary and ongoing registry of the Rostock infarction network (Drip & Ship) represents a well-defined cohort of patients subjected to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation infarction (STEMI) and served as the database for both candidates for an ICD for primary prevention of SCD and for sudden death (SCD) or ventricular tachycardia (VT) during follow-up.
Results: A total of 855 consecutive patients were treated with PCI for STEMI or NSTEMI in the region of Rostock (Germany) between 2001 and 2004. While all cause mortality was still 17.2%, the SCD rate was low at 1.3% during 728 ± 366 days of follow-up. Within that time 85 patients (9.9%) developed an indication for ICD therapy due to an impaired LV function (LVEF ≤ 35%) and heart failure. Univariate predictors of an ICD indication were delayed reperfusion (p = 0.001), a high creatine kinase (CK) max (p = 0.009), a persistent wide QRS complex (p = 0.001), previous cerebrovascular events (p = 0.033), and chronic renal failure (p = 0. 001). However, only 16.5% of these patients qualifying for an ICD actually received an ICD; nevertheless, the actual SCD rate was only 3.5%, while 5.4% (46 patients) suffered VTs or ventricular fibrillation (VF). The SCD/VT rate in the entire infarct population was associated with time to reperfusion (0.032), left bundle-branch block (0.002), a longer history of CAD (0.032), and VT during follow-up.
Conclusion: While mortality in patients with STEMI is still alarming even with PCI, the risk of SCD may be considerably decreased even in patients with an LVEF below 35%. With the current approach to primary prevention of sudden cardiac death, approximately 10% of postinfarction patients qualify for ICD therapy; however this may only reach a quarter of patients prone to SCD.