Literature DB >> 17593183

Magnitude, mechanism, and reproducibility of QT interval differences between superimposed global and individual lead ECG complexes.

Paul Kligfield1, Benoit Tyl, Martine Maarek, Pierre Maison-Blanche.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The global QT interval, emerging as a standard measurement provided by digital electrocardiographs, is defined by the earliest QRS onset and latest T-wave offset that occur in any of the standard leads. Differences between global ECG measurements and those from individual ECG leads have implications for the redefinition of normal values, for recognition of disease, and for drug safety. This study sought to quantify the differences between global QT intervals measured from 12 superimposed ECG leads with QT intervals and from single lead complexes, to examine the separate effects of QRS onset and T-wave offset on these differences, and to examine the reproducibility of these measurements.
METHODS: QTo intervals (Q onset to T offset) from 50 digitized ECGs sampled at 500 Hz were examined by computer assisted derivation of representative complexes from standard leads II, V(2), and V(3), by both baseline and tangent methods. Global QTo intervals were measured from superimposition of the representative complexes of all 12 leads. A time-coherent matrix of waveform onset and offset points allowed direct comparison of the components of the differences.
RESULTS: Global QTo and Bazett-adjusted global QTc were greater than each of the baseline and tangent measurements in representative leads II, V(2), and V(3), with mean differences ranging from 8 to 18 ms. QRS onset was earlier in the global complex than in each of the representative leads, with mean differences of 3-5 ms, whereas T-wave offset was significantly later in the global complex than in each of the representative leads, with mean differences of 5-11 ms. Remeasurement of all ECGs after an interval of 6 months confirmed the relative magnitudes of the global and individual lead QTo durations and small mean differences between pairs (-0.9 to 2.7 ms). Although global QTo had the largest mean difference (only 2.7 ms), it had the smallest standard deviation of the mean difference and lowest coefficient of variability (1.58%) of all measurements.
CONCLUSION: Global QT measurements are systematically larger than measurements from representative complexes of individual leads. These differences result from the combined effects of earlier QRS onset and later T-wave offset in the global complex, with T-wave offset the more dominant component of the difference.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17593183      PMCID: PMC6931960          DOI: 10.1111/j.1542-474X.2007.00153.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol        ISSN: 1082-720X            Impact factor:   1.468


  41 in total

1.  Using digital versus analog ECG data in clinical trials.

Authors:  R A Warner; N E Hill
Journal:  J Electrocardiol       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.438

Review 2.  QT interval measurements.

Authors:  Josef Kautzner
Journal:  Card Electrophysiol Rev       Date:  2002-09

3.  Variability in ECG computer interpretation. Analysis of individual complexes vs analysis of a representative complex.

Authors:  J A Kors; G van Herpen; J H van Bemmel
Journal:  J Electrocardiol       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 1.438

Review 4.  Drug-induced cardiac toxicity: emphasizing the role of electrocardiography in clinical research and drug development.

Authors:  Ihor Gussak; Jeffrey Litwin; Robert Kleiman; Scott Grisanti; Joel Morganroth
Journal:  J Electrocardiol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 1.438

5.  Algorithms for computerized QT analysis.

Authors:  Q Xue; S Reddy
Journal:  J Electrocardiol       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 1.438

6.  Analysis of interval measurements on CSE multilead reference ECGs.

Authors:  B R Reddy; Q Xue; C Zywietz
Journal:  J Electrocardiol       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 1.438

7.  Accuracy of four automatic QT measurement techniques in cardiac patients and healthy subjects.

Authors:  N B McLaughlin; R W Campbell; A Murray
Journal:  Heart       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 5.994

8.  Assessment of QT interval and QT dispersion for prediction of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in American Indians: The Strong Heart Study.

Authors:  P M Okin; R B Devereux; B V Howard; R R Fabsitz; E T Lee; T K Welty
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2000 Jan 4-11       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  Prolonged QT interval predicts cardiac and all-cause mortality in the elderly. The Rotterdam Study.

Authors:  M C de Bruyne; A W Hoes; J A Kors; A Hofman; J H van Bemmel; D E Grobbee
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 29.983

10.  Heart rate-corrected QT interval prolongation predicts risk of coronary heart disease in black and white middle-aged men and women: the ARIC study.

Authors:  Jacqueline M Dekker; Richard S Crow; Peter J Hannan; Evert G Schouten; Aaron R Folsom
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2004-02-18       Impact factor: 24.094

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  The thorough QT/QTc study 4 years after the implementation of the ICH E14 guidance.

Authors:  Borje Darpo
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2009-11-18       Impact factor: 8.739

2.  A pilot study of QT interval analysis in overweight and obese youth.

Authors:  Shirleatha Lee; Patricia Ann Cowan; Pedro Velasquez-Mieyer
Journal:  Appl Nurs Res       Date:  2011-01-20       Impact factor: 2.257

3.  Predictive Power of f99 Repolarization Index for the Occurrence of Ventricular Arrhythmias.

Authors:  Corrado Giuliani; Cees A Swenne; Sumche Man; Angela Agostinelli; Sandro Fioretti; Francesco Di Nardo; Laura Burattini
Journal:  Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol       Date:  2015-11-25       Impact factor: 1.468

4.  Automatic identification of a stable QRST complex for non-invasive evaluation of human cardiac electrophysiology.

Authors:  Gunilla Lundahl; Lennart Gransberg; Gabriel Bergqvist; Göran Bergström; Lennart Bergfeldt
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-09-17       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Automatic Identification of the Repolarization Endpoint by Computing the Dominant T-wave on a Reduced Number of Leads.

Authors:  C Giuliani; A Agostinelli; F Di Nardo; S Fioretti; L Burattini
Journal:  Open Biomed Eng J       Date:  2016-04-30

6.  Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Concentration-QTc Analysis of Tetrodotoxin: A Randomized, Dose Escalation Study in Healthy Adults.

Authors:  Mojgan Kavoosi; Terry E O'Reilly; Mehran Kavoosi; Peng Chai; Caroline Engel; Walter Korz; Christopher C Gallen; Robert M Lester
Journal:  Toxins (Basel)       Date:  2020-08-09       Impact factor: 4.546

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.