Clinical studyRisk stratification after acute myocardial infarction☆
References (30)
- et al.
Coronary prognostic index for predicting survival after recovery from acute myocardial infarction
Lancet
(1970) - et al.
Relation of ventricular arrhythmias in the late hospital phase of acute myocardial infarction to sudden death after hospital discharge
Am J Med
(1975) - et al.
Prognostic significance of ventricular dysrhythmias 1 year after myocardial infarction (abstr)
Am J Cardiol
(1976) - et al.
Initial myocardial infarction among 503 veterans
Am J Med
(1960) - et al.
Sudden death: identification of high risk groups
Am Heart J
(1973) - et al.
Prognostic factors in myocardial infarction
Lancet
(1957) - et al.
Prognosis of men after first myocardial infarction: mortality and first recurrence in relation to selected parameters
Am J Public Health
(1968) - et al.
Immediate mortality and five year survival of employed men with a first myocardial infarction
N Engl J Med
(1964) - et al.
The post-hospital phase of myocardial infarction: identification of patients with increased mortality risk
Circulation
(1974) - et al.
The early posthospital phase of myocardial infarction: prognostic stratification
Circulation
(1976)
A coronary prognostic index for grading the severity of infarction
Br Heart J
Prognostic significance of electrocardiographic changes in survivors of myocardial infarction
Acta Med Scand
Prognostic importance of premature beats following myocardial infarction
JAMA
Prognosis in medically treated coronary artery disease: the value of ejection fraction compared with other measurements (abstr)
Clin Res
Statistical Package for Social Sciences
Cited by (168)
Assessment, Significance and Mechanism of Ventricular Electrical Instability after Myocardial Infarction
2007, Heart Lung and CirculationCitation Excerpt :However, predisposition to spontaneous VT, VF and sudden death is not necessarily related to another ischaemic event.24 Approximately one half of all deaths during the year following myocardial infarction are sudden5,7,11,25–29 and due to VT or VF.30 However, patients who die suddenly do not comprise a homogeneous group.
Do baseline characteristics accurately discriminate between patients likely versus unlikely to benefit from implantable defibrillator therapy? Evaluation of the Canadian Implantable Defribillator Study implantable cardioverter defribrillatory efficacy score in the antiarrhythmics versus implantable defribrillators trial
2001, American Heart JournalCitation Excerpt :Finally, neither old age nor advanced NYHA class were useful in identifying patients in AVID likely to derive benefit from ICD therapy. Previous research has convincingly shown that patients with significant LV dysfunction (ie, an LV EF value ≤0.35) are at high risk for sudden death.11-13 The findings of past analyses of data from AVID,5 CIDS,6 and MADIT7 and the findings of the current analysis indicate that patients with depressed LV EF values derive greater benefit from ICD versus AAD use than do patients with less severe LV systolic dysfunction.
Ejection fraction by radionuclide ventriculography and contrast left ventriculogram: A tale of two techniques
1999, Journal of the American College of CardiologyThe structure of emotions during acute myocardial infarction: A model of coping
1998, Social Science and MedicineCritical analysis of coronary artery bypass graft surgery: A 30-year journey
1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology
- ☆
This study was supported in part by Grant HL-12738 from the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland and by Grants-in-Aid from the Winthrop Foundation and the Chernow Foundation.