Is RBBB the new LBBB? Are we going to repeat the same mistakes?

Is RBBB the new LBBB? Are we going to repeat the same mistakes?

Information on a study by Farinha et al which describes 481 patients with acute myocardial infarction, including 32 patients (6.7%) with right bundle branch block (RBBB) is presented. They excluded patients with left bundle branch block, nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay or electronic ve...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of electrocardiology 2021-03, Vol.65, p.34-36
Hauptverfasser: Birnbaum, Yochai, Nikus, Kjell, Atar, Dan, Jneid, Hani
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Heart attacks
Patients
Studies
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 36
container_issue
container_start_page 34
container_title Journal of electrocardiology
container_volume 65
creator Birnbaum, Yochai
Nikus, Kjell
Atar, Dan
Jneid, Hani
description Information on a study by Farinha et al which describes 481 patients with acute myocardial infarction, including 32 patients (6.7%) with right bundle branch block (RBBB) is presented. They excluded patients with left bundle branch block, nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay or electronic ventricular pacing. Half of the patients had ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2020.12.010
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2480271393</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0022073620306233</els_id><sourcerecordid>2528500672</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-52c674b5ec1ad8bb58567ec40d6045b697064bb3906f044e0e4a2fa4756f12a33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE1rGzEQhkVpaJy0f6GI9NLLOqPR17oXE6f5AkMgtGeh1c6mu7F3XWndkH9fOU5L6KmnYZhnZl4exk4ETAUIc9pNO1pRGOMQfKynCJgHOAUBb9hEaIlFqSS8ZRMAxAKsNIfsKKUOAGZo8R07lFJZCxYmbH6T-N1iseDjD-I9PfJlbub8LBJ_JH4_tP09HwceaUN-fIaSXxNft2n0D5Tm79lB41eJPrzUY_b98uLb-XWxvL26OT9bFkFBORYag7Gq0hSEr8uq0qU2lvKsNqB0ZWYWjKoqOQPTgFIEpDw2XlltGoFeymP2eX93E4efW0qjyxECrVa-p2GbHKoS0Ao526Gf_kG7YRv7nM6hxlIDGIuZ-rKnQhxSitS4TWzXPj45AW6n2XXutWa30-wEuqw5L398ebGt1lT_Xf3jNQNf9wBlJ79aii6FlvpAdRvzSVcP7f_8-Q30WpC8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2528500672</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Is RBBB the new LBBB? Are we going to repeat the same mistakes?</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Birnbaum, Yochai ; Nikus, Kjell ; Atar, Dan ; Jneid, Hani</creator><creatorcontrib>Birnbaum, Yochai ; Nikus, Kjell ; Atar, Dan ; Jneid, Hani</creatorcontrib><description>Information on a study by Farinha et al which describes 481 patients with acute myocardial infarction, including 32 patients (6.7%) with right bundle branch block (RBBB) is presented. They excluded patients with left bundle branch block, nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay or electronic ventricular pacing. Half of the patients had ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-0736</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-8430</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2020.12.010</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33477070</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Heart attacks ; Patients ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Journal of electrocardiology, 2021-03, Vol.65, p.34-36</ispartof><rights>2020 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. Mar/Apr 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-52c674b5ec1ad8bb58567ec40d6045b697064bb3906f044e0e4a2fa4756f12a33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-52c674b5ec1ad8bb58567ec40d6045b697064bb3906f044e0e4a2fa4756f12a33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2020.12.010$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27922,27923,45993</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33477070$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Birnbaum, Yochai</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nikus, Kjell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atar, Dan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jneid, Hani</creatorcontrib><title>Is RBBB the new LBBB? Are we going to repeat the same mistakes?</title><title>Journal of electrocardiology</title><addtitle>J Electrocardiol</addtitle><description>Information on a study by Farinha et al which describes 481 patients with acute myocardial infarction, including 32 patients (6.7%) with right bundle branch block (RBBB) is presented. They excluded patients with left bundle branch block, nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay or electronic ventricular pacing. Half of the patients had ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).</description><subject>Heart attacks</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0022-0736</issn><issn>1532-8430</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkE1rGzEQhkVpaJy0f6GI9NLLOqPR17oXE6f5AkMgtGeh1c6mu7F3XWndkH9fOU5L6KmnYZhnZl4exk4ETAUIc9pNO1pRGOMQfKynCJgHOAUBb9hEaIlFqSS8ZRMAxAKsNIfsKKUOAGZo8R07lFJZCxYmbH6T-N1iseDjD-I9PfJlbub8LBJ_JH4_tP09HwceaUN-fIaSXxNft2n0D5Tm79lB41eJPrzUY_b98uLb-XWxvL26OT9bFkFBORYag7Gq0hSEr8uq0qU2lvKsNqB0ZWYWjKoqOQPTgFIEpDw2XlltGoFeymP2eX93E4efW0qjyxECrVa-p2GbHKoS0Ao526Gf_kG7YRv7nM6hxlIDGIuZ-rKnQhxSitS4TWzXPj45AW6n2XXutWa30-wEuqw5L398ebGt1lT_Xf3jNQNf9wBlJ79aii6FlvpAdRvzSVcP7f_8-Q30WpC8</recordid><startdate>202103</startdate><enddate>202103</enddate><creator>Birnbaum, Yochai</creator><creator>Nikus, Kjell</creator><creator>Atar, Dan</creator><creator>Jneid, Hani</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202103</creationdate><title>Is RBBB the new LBBB? Are we going to repeat the same mistakes?</title><author>Birnbaum, Yochai ; Nikus, Kjell ; Atar, Dan ; Jneid, Hani</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-52c674b5ec1ad8bb58567ec40d6045b697064bb3906f044e0e4a2fa4756f12a33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Heart attacks</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Birnbaum, Yochai</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nikus, Kjell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atar, Dan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jneid, Hani</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of electrocardiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Birnbaum, Yochai</au><au>Nikus, Kjell</au><au>Atar, Dan</au><au>Jneid, Hani</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Is RBBB the new LBBB? Are we going to repeat the same mistakes?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of electrocardiology</jtitle><addtitle>J Electrocardiol</addtitle><date>2021-03</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>65</volume><spage>34</spage><epage>36</epage><pages>34-36</pages><issn>0022-0736</issn><eissn>1532-8430</eissn><abstract>Information on a study by Farinha et al which describes 481 patients with acute myocardial infarction, including 32 patients (6.7%) with right bundle branch block (RBBB) is presented. They excluded patients with left bundle branch block, nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay or electronic ventricular pacing. Half of the patients had ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>33477070</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2020.12.010</doi><tpages>3</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-0736
ispartof Journal of electrocardiology, 2021-03, Vol.65, p.34-36
issn 0022-0736
1532-8430
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2480271393
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete - AutoHoldings
subjects Heart attacks
Patients
Studies
title Is RBBB the new LBBB? Are we going to repeat the same mistakes?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T15%3A44%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Is%20RBBB%20the%20new%20LBBB?%20Are%20we%20going%20to%20repeat%20the%20same%20mistakes?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20electrocardiology&rft.au=Birnbaum,%20Yochai&rft.date=2021-03&rft.volume=65&rft.spage=34&rft.epage=36&rft.pages=34-36&rft.issn=0022-0736&rft.eissn=1532-8430&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2020.12.010&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2528500672%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2528500672&rft_id=info:pmid/33477070&rft_els_id=S0022073620306233&rfr_iscdi=true