Activation of CD4+ T lymphocytes improves wound healing and survival after experimental myocardial infarction in mice.

BACKGROUND: The role of adaptive immunity, especially CD4(+) T-helper cells, has not yet been systematically investigated in wound healing and remodeling after myocardial infarction (MI). Therefore, we studied whether CD4(+) T cells become activated and influence wound healing after experimental MI in mice. METHODS AND RESULTS: When we compared sham versus MI in wild-type (WT) mice, T-cell receptor-dependent activation of both conventional Foxp3(-) and regulatory Foxp3(+) CD4(+) T cells could be demonstrated in heart-draining lymph nodes within the first week after MI. Concomitantly, we found infiltration of CD4(+) T cells in infarcted myocardium. To study the role of CD4(+) T cells in wound healing and remodeling, CD4(+) T-cell-deficient mice (CD4 knockout [KO], MHCII(Δ/Δ)) and T-cell receptor-transgenic OT-II mice recognizing an irrelevant ovalbumin-derived peptide were studied. Serial echocardiography up to day 56 after MI revealed increased left ventricular dilation in CD4 KO compared with WT mice. Within the infarcted myocardium, CD4 KO mice displayed higher total numbers of leukocytes and proinflammatory monocytes (18.3±3.0 10(4)/mg WT versus 75.7±17.0 10(4)/mg CD4 KO, P<0.05). MHCII(Δ/Δ) and OT-II mice displayed significantly greater mortality (21% WT versus 48% OT-II, P<0.05, and WT 22% versus 52% MHCII(Δ/Δ), P<0.05) and myocardial rupture rates than WT mice. Collagen matrix formation in the infarct zone was severely disturbed in CD4 KO and MHCII(Δ/Δ) mice, as well as in OT-II mice. CONCLUSIONS: The present study provides the first evidence that CD4(+) T cells become activated after MI, presumably driven by recognition of cardiac autoantigens, and facilitate wound healing of the myocardium.

Sudden death in patients with myocardial infarction and left ventricular dysfunction, heart failure, or both.

BACKGROUND: The risk of sudden death from cardiac causes is increased among survivors of acute myocardial infarction with reduced left ventricular systolic function. We assessed the risk and time course of sudden death in high-risk patients after myocardial infarction. METHODS: We studied 14,609 patients with left ventricular dysfunction, heart failure, or both after myocardial infarction to assess the incidence and timing of sudden unexpected death or cardiac arrest with resuscitation in relation to the left ventricular ejection fraction. RESULTS: Of 14,609 patients, 1067 (7 percent) had an event a median of 180 days after myocardial infarction: 903 died suddenly, and 164 were resuscitated after cardiac arrest. The risk was highest in the first 30 days after myocardial infarction--1.4 percent per month (95 percent confidence interval, 1.2 to 1.6 percent)--and decreased to 0.14 percent per month (95 percent confidence interval, 0.11 to 0.18 percent) after 2 years. Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 30 percent or less were at highest risk in this early period (rate, 2.3 percent per month; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.8 to 2.8 percent). Nineteen percent of all sudden deaths or episodes of cardiac arrest with resuscitation occurred within the first 30 days after myocardial infarction, and 83 percent of all patients who died suddenly did so in the first 30 days after hospital discharge. Each decrease of 5 percentage points in the left ventricular ejection fraction was associated with a 21 percent adjusted increase in the risk of sudden death or cardiac arrest with resuscitation in the first 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of sudden death is highest in the first 30 days after myocardial infarction among patients with left ventricular dysfunction, heart failure, or both. Thus, earlier implementation of strategies for preventing sudden death may be warranted in selected patients.

Left ventricular assessment in myocardial infarction: the VALIANT registry.

BACKGROUND: How often echocardiography and cardiac catheterization are used to evaluate left ventricular (LV) function in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) and how they are associated with quality of care is unknown. METHODS: Patients with MI in the Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction (VALIANT) registry were divided into those with (n = 1423) and without (n = 3968) heart failure (HF), and the use of either echocardiography or cardiac catheterization for LV assessment in each group was compared along with associated baseline characteristics. We evaluated the association between LV assessment and discharge medications. Using a multivariable model with a propensity analysis, we evaluated the association of LV assessment with in-hospital outcomes. RESULTS: Of the patients with HF, 322 (22.6%) had no LV assessment. Patients with HF with LV assessment were discharged more frequently under treatment with aspirin (81.3% vs 70.0%; P<.001), beta-blockers (65.6% vs 56.4%; P = .008), clopidogrel (30.4% vs 14.0%; P<.001), and statins (45.9% vs 34.2%; P<.001). Patients without HF who underwent LV assessment were discharged more frequently under treatment with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (53.8% vs 41.5%; P<.001). After adjustment for regional use, other covariates, and revascularization, LV assessment was associated with lower in-hospital mortality in patients with HF (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.45; P<.001) and in patients without HF (adjusted OR, 0.30; P<.001). After excluding deaths during the first 2 days, LV assessment remained associated with lower mortality in patients with HF (adjusted OR, 0.59; P = .03) and in patients without HF (adjusted OR, 0.41; P<.001). CONCLUSION: Left ventricular assessment was frequently not performed during the in-hospital stay of patients with acute MI, including those with clinical HF, and its use was associated with better quality of care.