ABSTRACT The occurrence of left bundle branch block (LBBB) is quite common in clinical practice. The changes in cardiac repolarization, caused by this disorder of electric conduction, may mask the presence of an acute myocardial infarction (AMI), delaying the diagnostic-therapeutic iter, with an important impact on prognosis. We describe the case of a woman of 59 years with LBBB, came to our observation for a constrictive chest pain associated with dyspnea. The diagnostic workup for suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS), initially conducted only on the analysis of the electrocardiogram (negative TnI at entry), showed the presence of coronary arteries free of stenosis. However, the diagnostic confirmation of AMI was completed after the rise of cardiac markers and the electrocardiographic changes. This case confirm the difficulty about the diagnosis of AMI in patients with LBBB and stresses, however, as the use of some criteria proposed in the literature [1-3] can guide to its identification, directing patient to an appropriate treatment.
Cite this paper
Sansone, A. , Bonura, F. , Castellano, F. , Iacona, R. , Mancuso, D. , Novo, G. , Assennato, P. and Novo, S. (2012) Left bundle branch block and myocardial infarction, a diagnosis not always easy: Our experience and review of literature. World Journal of Cardiovascular Diseases, 2, 90-94. doi: 10.4236/wjcd.2012.22014.
 Gunnarsson, G., Eriksson, P. and Dellborg, M. (2001) ECG criteria in diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction in the presence of left bundle branch block. International Journal of Cardiology, 78, 167-174.
 Kontos, M.C., McQueen, R.H., Jesse, R.L., et al. (2001) Can myocardial infarction be rapidly identified in emergency department patients who have left bundle-branch block? Annals of Emergency Medicine, 37, 431-438.
 Antman, E.M., Anbe, D.T., Armstrong, P.W., et al. (2004) “ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction—executive summary and report of the ACC/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction)”. Circulation, 110, 588-636.
 Zimetbaum, P.J. and Josephson, M.E. (2003) Use of the electrocardiogram in acute myocardial infarction. New England Journal of Medicine, 348, 933-940.
 Edhouse, J.A., Sakr, M., Angus, J., et al. (1999) Suspected myocardial infarction and left bundle branch block: Electrocardiographic indication of acute ischemia. Journal of Accident & Emergency Medicine, 16, 331-335.
 Tabas, J.A., Rodriguez, R.M., Seligman, H.K. and Gold- schlager, N.F. (2008) Electrocardiographic criteria for detecting acute myocardial infarction in patients with left bundle branch block: A meta-analysis. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 52, 329-336.
 Shlipak, M.G., Lyons, W.L., Go, A.S., et al. (1999) Should the electrocardiogram be used to guide therapy for patients with left bundle-branch block and suspected myo- cardial infarction? Journal of the American Medical Association, 281, 714-719.
 Shlipak, M.G., Go, A.S., Frederick, P.D., et al. (2000) Treatment and outcomes of left bundle-branch block patients with myocardial infarction who present without chest pain. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 36, 706-712. doi:10.1016/S0735-1097(00)00789-0
 Sgarbossa, E.B., et al. (1996) Electrocardiographic diagnosis of evolving acute myocardial infarction in the presence of left bundle-branch block. The New England Journal of Medicine, 334, 481-487.
 Sgarbossa, E.B., et al. (1996) Odds Ratio and scores for independent electrocardiographic criteria, for the GUSTO- 1 investigators. The New England Journal of Medicine, 334, 481-487.
 Sgarbossa, E.B., et al. (1996) Flow chart for the prediction of AMI in the presence of left bundle branch block, with the use of all possible combinations of the three independent electrocardiographic criteria for the GUSTO-1 investigators. The New England Journal of Medicine, 334, 481-487.
 Haywood, L. J., et al. (2005) “Left bundle branch block in acute myocardial infarction: Benign or malignant?” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 46, 39- 41. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2005.04.002