XXXX , @entity616 , and indications for pacing in acute myocardial infarction.

@entity1 @entity714 @entity1002 @entity1817 @entity5036 @entity1188 @entity1168 @entity616
@entity1168 and conduction disturbances are not infrequently observed in association with acute MI. The sinus node artery is supplied by the right coronary circulation only slightly more often than the left. As a result of concomitant vagotonia, however, @entity1817 is more common with inferior @entity1188 . This influence, as well as a predominantly right-sided circulation, also makes AV @entity616 more frequent with such @entity1188 . @entity1168 due to @entity1817 often require only observation. If symptomatic, they are usually responsive to vagolytic or chronotropic drugs, but may necessitate pacemaker therapy often only on a temporary basis. The distal conduction system including the bundle branches is supplied mainly, but not exclusively, by the left anterior descending artery. Thus, @entity5036 is often associated with anterior MI. The indications for both temporary and permanent prophylactic pacing in this situation remain controversial. Several authors have made recommendations based on risk stratification. We would temporarily pace @entity1 with anterior or indeterminate @entity1188 and new right or @entity714 , and probably those with @entity5036 of indeterminate age. All @entity1 with new bilateral or @entity5036 should be paced, regardless of @entity1188 site. Permanent prophylactic pacing would appear indicated in @entity1 exhibiting @entity5036 or perhaps new @entity714 and @entity1002 . In contrast to this group, the treatment of @entity1 who develop @entity616 , whether transient or permanent, is clear-cut. These @entity1 require continuous (temporary followed without interruption by permanent) pacemaker therapy (Table 3).
