Declining incidence of ventricular fibrillation in myocardial infarction. Implications for the prophylactic use of lidocaine.
- 1 September 1992
- journal article
- abstracts
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Circulation
- Vol. 86 (3) , 764-773
- https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.86.3.764
Abstract
BACKGROUND The purposes of the present investigation were 1) to track the incidence of primary ventricular fibrillation (VF) in the control and lidocaine-treated groups in the randomized control trials (RCTs) of lidocaine prophylaxis against primary VF in acute myocardial infarction, with particular emphasis on the time frame of the randomized trial, and 2) to estimate the number of patients who must receive lidocaine currently to prevent one episode of VF. METHODS AND RESULTS The following variables from RCTs published between 1969 and 1988 were entered into logistic regression models to predict the percent of patients developing VF: year of publication of the RCT, method of data analysis used in the RCT, route and technique of lidocaine administration, duration of monitoring for VF, and exclusion criteria before randomization (congestive heart failure/cardiogenic shock, ventricular tachycardia/VF, or bradycardia/atrioventricular block). Year of publication was a significant predictor of VF in both the control and lidocaine groups (p less than or equal to 0.002) even after adjusting for other covariates. Based on a univariate logistic regression model with year as the predictor variable, it was estimated that the incidence of primary VF in the control group fell from 4.51% in 1970 to 0.35% in 1990 and from 4.32% down to 0.11% for the lidocaine group over the same time period. Thus, about 400 patients would currently need prophylaxis with lidocaine to prevent one episode of VF. CONCLUSIONS Present estimates of the risk:benefit ratio of lidocaine prophylaxis should consider the low risk of VF in control patients and the large number who need lidocaine prophylaxis to prevent one episode of VF. When added to the previously reported trend toward excess mortality in lidocaine-treated patients, these data argue against the routine prophylactic use of lidocaine in patients with acute myocardial infarction.Keywords
This publication has 40 references indexed in Scilit:
- Effect of Captopril on Progressive Ventricular Dilatation after Anterior Myocardial InfarctionNew England Journal of Medicine, 1988
- An Assessment of Clinically Useful Measures of the Consequences of TreatmentNew England Journal of Medicine, 1988
- Primary Ventricular FibrillationNew England Journal of Medicine, 1987
- In-Hospital Prognosis of Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Primary Ventricular FibrillationNew England Journal of Medicine, 1987
- Prophylactic lidocaine in the prehospital patient with chest pain of suspected cardiac originAnnals of Emergency Medicine, 1986
- A Prospective Trial of Intravenous Streptokinase in Acute Myocardial Infarction (I.S.A.M.)New England Journal of Medicine, 1986
- Intramuscular Lidocaine for Prevention of Lethal Arrhythmias in the Prehospitalization Phase of Acute Myocardial InfarctionNew England Journal of Medicine, 1985
- Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: An overview of the randomized trialsProgress in Cardiovascular Diseases, 1985
- A Double-Blind Trial of Metoprolol in Acute Myocardial InfarctionNew England Journal of Medicine, 1983
- A controlled trial of intramuscular lidocaine in the prevention of premature ventricular contractions associated with acute myocardial infarctionAmerican Heart Journal, 1976