ライフサイエンスコーパス: bundle branch block

1 chemic pattern (ST-segment elevation or left bundle branch block).

2 -segment elevation or depression and/or left bundle-branch block).

3 LVP and BiVP in the failing heart with left bundle branch block.

4 duction system abnormalities, including left bundle branch block.

5 e branch block is far more common than right bundle branch block.

6 tivity and specificity in patients with left bundle branch block.

7 cal septal myectomy, 47 (40%) developed left bundle branch block.

8 ol septal ablation, 21 (36%) developed right bundle branch block.

9 spected AMI and ST segment elevation or left bundle branch block.

10 h of symptom onset with ST elevation or left bundle branch block.

11 egree atrioventricular block with associated bundle branch block.

12 (1.6%) had left (n = 131) or right (n = 289) bundle branch block.

13 95% CI, 1.08-2.42) for developing a complete bundle branch block.

14 60 patients with mild heart failure and left bundle branch block.

15 ose with QRS width 120 to 149 ms or non-left bundle branch block.

16 nts with heart failure (HF) and without left bundle branch block.

17 dent predictors of new onset persistent left bundle branch block.

18 morphology into those with and without left bundle-branch block.

19 lockade, and the presence of a complete left bundle-branch block.

20 ith or without systolic dysfunction and left bundle-branch block.

21 patients with systolic dysfunction and left bundle-branch block.

22 ventricular ejection fraction <35% and left bundle-branch block.

23 frequently accompanied by an apparent right bundle-branch block.

24 ng could differentiate between BrS and right bundle-branch block.

25 mal conduction, of whom 38.8% developed left bundle branch block, 1.1% developed right bundle branch

26 attempted permanent HBP in 27 patients (left bundle branch block 17, intraventricular conduction defe

27 QRSd >120 ms in 57 (39%) patients (27 right bundle branch block, 18 left bundle branch block, and 12

28 lts: (1) ST elevation or presumably new left bundle branch block, (2) other ECG signs indicating myoc

29 1.44) versus 1.04 (0.78, 1.51), de novo left bundle-branch block (4% versus 0%) and Q waves (5.3% ver

30 lows: right bundle-branch block, 65.2%; left bundle-branch block, 43.75%; normal QRS, 27.6%.

31 ing ECG abnormalities were as follows: right bundle-branch block, 65.2%; left bundle-branch block, 43

32 icular conduction delay, or incomplete right bundle branch block, a much higher proportion than in th

33 pacing/stimulation in DCM patients with left bundle-branch block acutely enhances systolic function w

34 possibly with harm in patients without left bundle-branch block (adjusted hazard ratio for death fro

35 h intraventricular conduction delay, such as bundle branch block after cardiac surgery.

36 y 17 patients (2.0%) had new Q waves or left bundle-branch block after surgery; however, cTnT elevati

37 New-onset persistent left bundle-branch block after TAVR occurred in 37 patients,

38 Bundle branch block also carried an independent 53% high

39 Presence of baseline bundle branch block and age >=70 were significantly asso

40 Twelve-lead ECGs during left bundle branch block and cardiac resynchronization therap

41 with Lugol's solution induced complete right bundle branch block and converted the bidirectional VT i

42 ion study identified a link between ETV1 and bundle branch block and heart block in humans.

43 hic VT (n = 23) or PVCs (n = 47) with a left bundle branch block and inferior QRS axis morphology.

44 rietal band VAs were characterized by a left bundle branch block and left inferior (n=12) or superior

45 to have nonischemic cardiomyopathy and left bundle branch block and less likely to have renal dysfun

46 failure with QRS duration >/=150 ms and left bundle branch block and less predictable in those with Q

47 significant difference was observed in left bundle branch block and RBBB (vs.

48 Left bundle branch block and RBBB induced similar QRS widenin

49 Right bundle branch block and right ventricular (RV) dysfuncti

50 cular ventricular tachycardia, and the right bundle branch block and ST segment elevation syndrome of

51 n association with typical or atypical right bundle branch block and ST-segment elevations (Brugada s

52 in; ventricular tachycardias (VTs) with left bundle branch block and V(3) transition remain a challen

53 Patients with new-onset persistent left bundle-branch block and a QRS duration >160 ms had a gre

54 nduction disturbances, mainly new-onset left bundle-branch block and advanced atrioventricular block

55 In left bundle-branch block and AV-block hearts, optimal hemodyn

56 justment for other significant factors, left bundle-branch block and intraventricular conduction dela

57 icular fibrillation characterized by a right bundle-branch block and ST elevation in the right precor

58 New-onset left bundle-branch block and the need for permanent pacemaker

59 er implantation after TAVR, with prior right bundle-branch block and transcatheter valve type and imp

60 ts reviewed presenting ECGs to identify left bundle-branch block and, in the absence of left bundle-b

61 ients (27 right bundle branch block, 18 left bundle branch block, and 12 intraventricular conduction

62 93% had ST-segment elevation or bundle branch block, and 7% had ST-segment depression.

63 od pressure <100 mm Hg, anterior MI, or left bundle branch block, and as "low clinical risk" if none

64 rate, and with prevalent hypertension, right bundle branch block, and cardiovascular disease.

65 smoking, left ventricular hypertrophy, left bundle branch block, and diabetes mellitus; it had good

66 erapy for patients with cardiomyopathy, left bundle branch block, and heart failure.

67 rbidities, ischemic cardiomyopathy, non-left bundle branch block, and lower %CRT pacing vs. responder

68 ents with left bundle branch block, non-left bundle branch block, and right bundle branch block morph

69 isease), normal QT intervals, apparent right bundle branch block, and sudden cardiac death, particula

70 le-branch block (LBBB), 228 (13%) with right bundle-branch block, and 308 (17%) with nonspecific intr

71 ent smoking, body mass index >35 kg/m2, left bundle-branch block, and left ventricular hypertrophy.

72 Conduction abnormalities including bundle branch block are recognized sequelae following se

73 ude various RSR' patterns, without a typical bundle-branch block are markers of altered ventricular d

74 athophysiologic and clinical aspects of left bundle branch block, as well as current and future strat

75 us persistent ST-segment elevation and right bundle branch block, as well as the effectiveness of sod

76 Bundle branch block at hospital admission in patients wi

77 ricular (AV) block, bifascicular block, left bundle branch block, atrial fibrillation, and left ventr

78 Patients (n = 44) with bundle branch blocks, atrial flutter or fibrillation, pa

79 No interaction with therapy arm and bundle branch block (BBB) status was found.

80 versus 85 to 99 ms and >/=100 ms (excluding bundle branch block [BBB]) and QRS morphology in those w

81 incident heart failure (HF) associated with bundle-branch blocks (BBBs) in postmenopausal women.

82 ing permanent pacing, three of whom had left bundle branch block before the procedure.

83 patients, 8.1% of whom had intermittent left bundle-branch block before the procedure.

84 io-ventricular conduction block (AVB), right bundle branch block, bradycardia, and the Brugada syndro

85 as applied in the presence of complete right bundle branch block by atrial-synchronized RV free wall

86 he right bundle branch correlated with right-bundle-branch block by ECG.

87 Atrial Fibrillation, Myocardial Infarction, Bundle Branch Block, Cardiomyopathy, Dysrhythmia, and Hy

88 es were significant among patients with left bundle branch block conduction disturbance (n = 1,204, p

89 y in those with QRS >/= 150 ms and with left bundle branch block conduction disturbance, respectively

90 ctural heart disease associated with a right bundle branch block conduction pattern and ST-segment el

91 In patients with mild heart failure and left bundle branch block, decreased RWT was associated with a

92 dle-branch block and, in the absence of left bundle-branch block, definite STEMI (according to both c

93 After the procedure, left bundle branch block developed in 46% of septal myectomy

94 vival benefit of CRT-D in patients with left bundle-branch block did not differ significantly accordi

95 structural heart disease, paced rhythms, and bundle branch block during sinus rhythm were excluded.

96 toms, left ventricular dysfunction, and left bundle-branch block, early intervention with CRT-D was a

97 Ten DCM patients with left bundle-branch block (ejection fraction 20+/-3%, QRS dura

98 nsustained ventricular tachycardia with left bundle branch block excluding right ventricular outflow

99 and 24 patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block followed by computer simulations of

100 55; p = 0.033) and new-onset persistent left bundle-branch block following TAVR (HR: 2.26, 95% CI: 1.

101 ological substrate and 6 patients with right bundle-branch block for comparison.

102 left ventricular ejection fraction and left bundle-branch block; group 3 (n=20), left ventricular ej

103 We identified 12 affected individuals (right bundle-branch block, > or =1-mm STE) with an autosomal d

104 Unlike BrS, right bundle-branch block had delayed activation in the entire

105 yridamole or adenosine in patients with left bundle-branch block has not been established.

106 Studies of patients with acute MI and bundle branch block have reported high mortality rates a

107 In left bundle-branch block hearts, CRTopt occurred at A-LV inte

108 HFEs was pronounced among patients with left bundle branch block (HR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.49, p <

109 was neutral, regardless of morphology, right bundle branch block (HR=1.01, P=0.975), and intraventric

110 ST elevation/left bundle branch block identified patients with reduced Thr

111 (ii) heart with a conduction disorder (right bundle branch block) (iii) focal activation initiated by

112 ses and by observing a VA increase with left bundle branch block in 2 cases.

113 n resulted in ST-segment elevation and right bundle branch block in all patients in group A and in al

114 lar tachycardia in 26, and intermittent left bundle-branch block in 3 patients.

115 Left bundle-branch block incidence was 13% at baseline and 61

116 Idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias of left bundle branch block inferior axis morphology are usually

117 hic pattern associated with this VT was left bundle branch block, inferior axis and early precordial

118 Normal heart VT with left bundle branch block, inferior axis and early precordial

119 Twelve patients with normal heart left bundle branch block, inferior axis VT and previously fai

120 T-VT and ARVD/C-VT patients can share a left bundle branch block/inferior axis morphology.

121 premature ventricular contractions with left bundle branch block/inferior axis pattern in 16 ARVD/C p

122 ch block/inferior axis, case 3 showed a left bundle branch block/inferior axis, and case 4 showed a n

123 h block/superior axis, case 2 showed a right bundle branch block/inferior axis, case 3 showed a left

124 a and a wide complex tachycardia with a left bundle branch block/inferior axis.

125 t bundle branch block (LBBB; including right bundle branch block, intraventricular conduction delay)

126 Left bundle branch block is a common sequela after septal mye

127 We hypothesized that right bundle branch block is associated with specific RV mecha

128 Left bundle branch block is far more common than right bundle

129 pa 0.52), and Q waves (kappa 0.44), good for bundle branch block (kappa 0.78), and very good for atri

130 atrial arrhythmias (kappa 0.84 and 0.79) and bundle branch block (kappa 0.88 and 0.79).

131 baseline, while MB-LATER score (Male gender, Bundle branch block, LA, AF Type, Early Recurrences) 3 m

132 a pronounced effect among patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.58; p <

133 82], p = 0.001) and CRT-D patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) (HR: 0.51 [95% CI: 0.35 to 0.

134 evolution in ST segment, T or Q wave or left bundle branch block (LBBB) abnormalities between the pre

135 ronization Therapy) study patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and 0, 1, 2, or >/=3 comorbid

136 ific syndrome characterized by isolated left bundle branch block (LBBB) and a history of progressive

137 t to separate the effects of associated left bundle branch block (LBBB) and coronary artery disease (

138 de (VAQRS), halfway between that during left bundle branch block (LBBB) and LV pacing, reflects optim

139 ata on the clinical impact of new-onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) and permanent pacemaker impla

140 t guidelines suggest that patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) be treated with cardiac resyn

141 Left bundle branch block (LBBB) causes left ventricular (LV)

142 tion therapy (CRT) in patients with non-left bundle branch block (LBBB) conduction abnormality have n

143 ild heart failure (HF) patients without left bundle branch block (LBBB) did not derive a significant

144 and death events in CRT-D patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) enrolled in MADIT-CRT (Multic

145 rognostic value of new-onset persistent left bundle branch block (LBBB) in patients undergoing transc

146 Patients without left bundle branch block (LBBB) or patients with smaller QRS

147 BB) patients have larger scar size than left bundle branch block (LBBB) patients do.

148 a suspected acute coronary syndrome and left bundle branch block (LBBB) present a unique diagnostic a

149 no benefit of CRT-D in patients without left bundle branch block (LBBB) regardless of patient sex.

150 Studies in canine hearts with acute left bundle branch block (LBBB) showed that endocardial left

151 nts with CRT-D in a very wide QRSD with left bundle branch block (LBBB) versus those without LBBB.

152 Left bundle branch block (LBBB) was present in 65 patients, r

153 ead electrocardiographic morphology was left bundle branch block (LBBB), and in 15, it was nonspecifi

154 hy (DCM); in particular, the effects of left bundle branch block (LBBB), coronary artery disease (CAD

155 In contrast to patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB), heart failure patients with

156 Among patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB), women had a 21% lower mortal

157 synchronization therapy candidates with left bundle branch block (LBBB)-like electrocardiogram morpho

158 in mildly symptomatic HF patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB).

159 ronary artery disease and patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB).

160 hearts with a pure right (RBBB) versus left bundle branch block (LBBB).

161 ions of a healthy human heart, and with left bundle branch block (LBBB).

162 Sd) >=150 ms and subjective labeling of left bundle branch block (LBBB).

163 Therapy (MADIT-CRT), patients with non-left bundle branch block (LBBB; including right bundle branch

164 strated an adverse impact of persistent left bundle-branch block (LBBB) after surgical aortic valve r

165 Of these, 1175 had left bundle-branch block (LBBB) and 308 had non-LBBB.

166 ree wall differed between patients with left bundle-branch block (LBBB) and normal QRSd and if synchr

167 go exercise testing develop a transient left bundle-branch block (LBBB) during exercise, but its prog

168 tricular outflow tract arrhythmias with left bundle-branch block (LBBB) morphology.

169 trials were greater among patients with left bundle-branch block (LBBB) or longer QRS duration.

170 Septal activation in patients with left bundle-branch block (LBBB) patterns has not been describ

171 d to investigate the cardiac effects of left bundle-branch block (LBBB) using myocardial contrast ech

172 at baseline, there were 1281 (70%) with left bundle-branch block (LBBB), 228 (13%) with right bundle-

173 ardial infarction (MI) in patients with left bundle-branch block (LBBB), but the clinical impact of t

174 ough 30% to 50% of patients develop new left bundle-branch block (LBBB), its effect on clinical outco

175 similarly augment systolic function in left bundle-branch block (LBBB)-failing hearts despite differ

176 ts with (1) RV dilatation, (2) multiple left bundle-branch block (LBBB)-type VTs, and (3) an abnormal

177 milliseconds, and 60.5% of subjects had left bundle-branch block (LBBB).

178 s subjective and further complicated by left bundle-branch block (LBBB).

179 yocardial infarction (MI) patients with left bundle-branch block (LBBB).

180 rformed in anesthetized dogs with acute left bundle-branch block (LBBB, n=10) and chronic LBBB with t

181 5+/-12; ejection fraction 26+/-7%) with left bundle-branch block (LBBB; QRS duration 174+/-18 ms) wer

182 rdiographic abnormalities (long PR, complete bundle branch block, left ventricular hypertrophy voltag

183 tment group, age, gender, QRS duration, left bundle-branch block, left ventricular ejection fraction,

184 the 9 patients; 9 of the 11 VTs had a right bundle branch block/left-axis morphology that mimicked l

185 Left bundle branch block-like dyssynchrony caused by DDD paci

186 lvement, and electrical abnormalities (right bundle branch block/low voltages) was developed to predi

187 diothoracic ratio, higher prevalence of left bundle branch block, lower prevalence of atrial fibrilla

188 Left bundle branch block may also develop following aortic va

189 Left bundle branch block may be due to conduction system dege

190 lure with reduced ejection fraction and left bundle branch block may respond positively to cardiac re

191 nts had nonischemic cardiomyopathy with left bundle branch block, median LVEF of 29%, and a mean QRS

192 tricular arrhythmias with a predominant left bundle branch block morphology and no ECG or echocardiog

193 hallenging because they present with a right bundle branch block morphology by electrocardiography.

194 rall, patients with mild HF but without left bundle branch block morphology did not derive clinical b

195 od may assist in objective classification of bundle branch block morphology in CRT.

196 ricular arrhythmias with a predominant right bundle branch block morphology, 13 of 27 (48%) showed EC

197 ntricular arrhythmias with polymorphic/right bundle branch block morphology, without significant regu

198 ock, non-left bundle branch block, and right bundle branch block morphology.

199 arrhythmias arising intramurally had a left bundle-branch block morphology with inferior axis.

200 scale), but not among patients without left bundle branch block (n = 494).

201 increase in VA interval coincident with left bundle branch block (n=2).

202 hic ventricular arrhythmias (n=6), and right bundle-branch block (n=5).

203 CRT was performed in dogs with chronic left bundle-branch block (n=8) or atrioventricular (AV) block

204 ern and 16 controls (narrow QRS, n=11; right bundle-branch block, n=5).

205 clinical response between patients with left bundle branch block, non-left bundle branch block, and r

206 Preoperative right bundle branch block (odds ratio [OR], 3.6; 95% confidenc

207 Heart failure patients with left bundle branch block often benefit acutely from CRT; howe

208 (paced rhythms, ventricular rhythms, or left bundle-branch block) on the ECG performed before thrombo

209 ere most pronounced among patients with left bundle branch block or a QRS duration at least 150 ms an

210 and major conduction abnormalities (new left bundle branch block or high-degree atrioventricular bloc

211 end point was a combination of complete left bundle branch block or high-degree atrioventricular bloc

212 d the clinical outcome of patients with left bundle branch block or intraventricular conduction delay

213 onged P-R interval, but not incomplete right bundle-branch block or early repolarization patterns, in

214 cardia, QRS prolongation resulting from left bundle-branch block or intraventricular conduction delay

215 patients with a non-LBBB QRS pattern (right bundle-branch block or intraventricular conduction distu

216 ry (OR 4.6; P = 0.016), the presence of left bundle branch block (OR 39; P = 0.002), and first-degree

217 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.3), preoperative left bundle branch block (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3 to 2.9), preop

218 ration >/=150 ms (OR: 1.79; p = 0.007), left bundle branch block (OR: 2.05; p = 0.006), body mass ind

219 abnormalities, left ventricular hypertrophy, bundle branch block, or left-axis deviation) or exercise

220 irst-degree atrioventricular block, complete bundle branch block, or pacemaker insertion, and 1471 ag

221 Right bundle-branch block- or multiple-morphology EIVA is asso

222 rsely correlated with the presence of a left bundle branch block (P<0.01).

223 h a higher rate of new onset persistent left bundle branch block, particularly in patients receiving

224 respectively) and nonsignificant in non-left bundle branch block patients (HR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.77 to

225 long-term clinical outcomes of 537 non-left bundle branch block patients with mild HF enrolled in th

226 Left bundle-branch block patients have a high mortality after

227 Left bundle-branch block patients with chest pain were greate

228 Left bundle-branch block patients with MI who present without

229 Among 1274 left bundle-branch block patients, 413 (32%) presented with G

230 Among non-left bundle-branch block patients, low GFR predicted outcomes

231 ferentiated from the A-LV summit VAs by left bundle branch block pattern, QRS duration </=175 ms, pre

232 icular fibrillation characterized by a right bundle-branch block pattern and ST elevation (STE) in th

233 tricular contractions with right and/or left bundle branch block patterns were identified.

234 HBP can also overcome bundle branch block patterns, and data are accumulating

235 ease, left ventricular hypertrophy, and left bundle-branch block predicted risk of HFREF.

236 after the procedure, three of whom had right bundle branch block preoperatively.

237 entricular enlargement only, one with a left bundle branch block) presented with advanced HF and SCD,

238 and male sex, left ventricular hypertrophy, bundle branch block, previous myocardial infarction, and

239 tensive ST-segment elevation, new-onset left bundle branch block, previous myocardial infarction, Kil

240 raventricular conduction delay but not right bundle-branch block provided prognostic information abou

241 P<0.001) along with elimination of the right bundle branch block QRS morphology, increase in RV filli

242 ion (OR=0.32; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.53) and left bundle-branch block QRS morphology (OR=0.21; 95% CI, 0.1

243 cular block (PR interval, >=0.2 s), complete bundle branch block (QRS, >=0.12 s), or pacemaker insert

244 score (female sex, nonischemic origin, left bundle-branch block, QRS >/=150 milliseconds, prior hosp

245 , SA was found to increase the risk of right bundle branch block (RBBB) (pooled odds ratio [OR]: 56.3

246 aventricular tachycardia with aberrant right bundle branch block (RBBB) and left anterior hemiblock (

247 ock (LBBB) was present in 65 patients, right bundle branch block (RBBB) in 48 patients, and nonspecif

248 ricular conduction delay (NICD) versus right bundle branch block (RBBB) in patients eligible for impl

249 udy sought to test the hypothesis that right bundle branch block (RBBB) patients have larger scar siz

250 ft bundle branch block, 1.1% developed right bundle branch block (RBBB), and 0.6% had complete heart

251 normal subjects; (5) 18 patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB).

252 e more likely to have hypertension and right bundle branch block (RBBB).

253 lock may be made when catheter-induced right bundle-branch block (RBBB) develops in patients with bas

254 mapping, including all 4 patients with right bundle-branch block (RBBB) VT.

255 Right bundle-branch block (RBBB) was present in 11 patients (2

256 RV problems may include right bundle-branch block (RBBB), volume loading, and chamber

257 of ventricular tachycardia (VT) with a right bundle-branch block (RBBB)-type pattern and an R-S ratio

258 with few patients in subgroups such as right bundle-branch block (RBBB).

259 ostic ECG markers in the presence of a right bundle-branch block (RBBB).

260 Left bundle branch block reduced peak Vo(2) (by 10.5 ml.kg(-1

261 nization therapy for heart failure with left bundle branch block reduces left ventricular (LV) conduc

262 Patients with left bundle-branch block, regardless of baseline renal functi

263 excitation, as well as during right or left bundle branch block, resembled experimental measurements

264 ior hemiblock (RR: 1.62; p < 0.01), or right bundle branch block (RR: 2.89; p < 0.01) at baseline; an

265 ents with congenital heart disease and right bundle branch block, RV cardiac resynchronization therap

266 atients with systolic heart failure and left bundle-branch block scheduled for cardiac resynchronizat

267 , nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, left bundle branch block, signal-averaged electrocardiogram,

268 patients with QRS 120 to 149 ms or non-left bundle branch block, significant associations of baselin

269 Left bundle branch block significantly determines resting t-I

270 eria (QRS duration of 120-149 ms or non-left bundle branch block), SSI>/=9.7% was independently assoc

271 ribed in patients with the syndrome of right bundle branch block, ST-segment elevation in leads V1 to

272 Case 1 showed a left bundle branch block/superior axis, case 2 showed a right

273 ectrocardiography showed sinus rhythm, right bundle branch block, T-wave inversion in V6, and evidenc

274 was relatively well preserved, and the right bundle-branch block type of BBR was frequently induced.

275 Patients with either right bundle-branch block type or polymorphic complex ventricu

276 ree patients with systolic heart failure and bundle-branch block underwent implantation of biventricu

277 reverse remodeling is predicted by the left bundle branch block ventricular activation sequence, the

278 Patients presenting with left bundle branch block ventricular tachycardia in the setti

279 T waves on inferior leads, and all had right bundle-branch block ventricular arrhythmias.

280 depression greater than 1 mm, complete left bundle-branch block, ventricular paced rhythm, preexcita

281 Left bundle branch block was associated with higher LV mass a

282 n 46% of septal myectomy patients, and right bundle branch block was evident in 58% of alcohol septal

283 in the VA interval with the development of a bundle branch block was the only tachycardia characteris

284 eath from any cause among patients with left bundle-branch block was 18% among patients randomly assi

285 an electrocardiographic pattern showing left bundle-branch block was associated with a significant re

286 Complete or incomplete left bundle-branch block was found in 15.4% of the parents an

287 Right bundle-branch block was not associated with arrhythmic o

288 Complete or incomplete right bundle-branch block was observed in 39.2% of the parents

289 tion, left ventricular hypertrophy, and left bundle branch block were strongly associated with HF in

290 urface electrocardiographic patterns of left bundle-branch block were all noted during intentional an

291 on-4, we studied patients with STEMI or left bundle branch block who received acute reperfusion with

292 associated with ST-segment elevation or left bundle branch block who underwent primary angioplasty.

293 dy group consisted of 245 patients with left bundle-branch block who underwent tomographic (single ph

294 associated with ST-segment elevation or left bundle-branch block who were treated with primary angiop

295 acute STEMI (including 3 patients with left bundle-branch block) who were undergoing infarct-artery

296 pidemia, and had more often a non-LBBB (left bundle branch block) wide QRS complex, and lower left ve

297 h NSVT or VT, the dominant morphology (right-bundle branch block with superior axis) was 100% predict

298 h a higher rate of new onset persistent left bundle branch block with the CoreValve (47.7% versus 35.

299 %, 55% ischemic cardiomyopathy, and 71% left bundle-branch block) with a follow-up of 29+/-11 months.

300 able adjustment, older age, female sex, left bundle branch block, worsened heart failure class, highe