INTRODUCTION: Changes in the autonomic nervous system activity are a major trigger of life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VTAs). Mental arithmetic, a condition administered in a laboratory setting, can provide insight into the autonomic nervous system activity effects on cardiac physiology. We examined the responses of cardiac repolarization to laboratory-induced psychological stressors in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) with the objective of identifying the indices that differentiate patients with and without subsequent VTA in follow-up. METHODS: Continuous electrocardiographic signals were recorded using 3 standard bipolar (Holter) leads in 56 patients (age, 63.6 ± 11.9; female, 12%; left ventricular ejection fraction, 32.3 ± 11) with ICDs during mental arithmetic. The patients were separated into those with subsequent VTA during 3 to 4 years of follow-up (group 1: n = 9) and those without VTA (group 2: n = 47). Changes in repolarization (QT interval, mean T wave amplitude [Tamp], and T wave area) were analyzed during 5 minutes at baseline, stress, and recovery. The temporal instability of Tamp and T wave area was examined using the range (Δ) and variance (σ(2)) of beat-to-beat variations of the corresponding parameters. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in heart rate between the 2 groups at baseline (61 vs 63 beats per minute, P = .97), stress (64 vs 65 beats per minute, P = .40), and recovery (62 vs 61 beats per minute, P = .88). However, during mental stress and poststress recovery, ΔTamp was almost 2-fold greater in group 1 compared with group 2 (111 [57-203] vs 68 [44-94] μV, P = .04, respectively). Changes in QT intervals were also greater in group 1 compared with group 2 (P = .02). CONCLUSION: Among patients with ICDs, changes of Tamp after psychological stress were greater in those with subsequent arrhythmic events. This might signal proarrhythmic repolarization response and help identify patients who would benefit the most from ICD implantation and proactive management.
INTRODUCTION: Changes in the autonomic nervous system activity are a major trigger of life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VTAs). Mental arithmetic, a condition administered in a laboratory setting, can provide insight into the autonomic nervous system activity effects on cardiac physiology. We examined the responses of cardiac repolarization to laboratory-induced psychological stressors in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) with the objective of identifying the indices that differentiate patients with and without subsequent VTA in follow-up. METHODS: Continuous electrocardiographic signals were recorded using 3 standard bipolar (Holter) leads in 56 patients (age, 63.6 ± 11.9; female, 12%; left ventricular ejection fraction, 32.3 ± 11) with ICDs during mental arithmetic. The patients were separated into those with subsequent VTA during 3 to 4 years of follow-up (group 1: n = 9) and those without VTA (group 2: n = 47). Changes in repolarization (QT interval, mean T wave amplitude [Tamp], and T wave area) were analyzed during 5 minutes at baseline, stress, and recovery. The temporal instability of Tamp and T wave area was examined using the range (Δ) and variance (σ(2)) of beat-to-beat variations of the corresponding parameters. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in heart rate between the 2 groups at baseline (61 vs 63 beats per minute, P = .97), stress (64 vs 65 beats per minute, P = .40), and recovery (62 vs 61 beats per minute, P = .88). However, during mental stress and poststress recovery, ΔTamp was almost 2-fold greater in group 1 compared with group 2 (111 [57-203] vs 68 [44-94] μV, P = .04, respectively). Changes in QT intervals were also greater in group 1 compared with group 2 (P = .02). CONCLUSION: Among patients with ICDs, changes of Tamp after psychological stress were greater in those with subsequent arrhythmic events. This might signal proarrhythmic repolarization response and help identify patients who would benefit the most from ICD implantation and proactive management.
Authors: Fabrice Extramiana; Charif Tatar; Pierre Maison-Blanche; Isabelle Denjoy; Anne Messali; Patrick Dejode; Frank Iserin; Antoine Leenhardt Journal: Europace Date: 2010-05-14 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: V Shusterman; A Beigel; S I Shah; B Aysin; R Weiss; V K Gottipaty; D Schwartzman; K P Anderson Journal: J Electrocardiol Date: 1999 Impact factor: 1.438
Authors: Antonio Luiz Pinho Ribeiro; Manoel Otávio D A Costa Rocha; Paolo Terranova; Marco Cesarano; Maria D O Carmo Pereira Nunes; Federico Lombardi Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2011-01-14
Authors: Rachel Lampert; Tammy Joska; Matthew M Burg; William P Batsford; Craig A McPherson; Diwakar Jain Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-10-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Willem J Kop; David S Krantz; Bruce D Nearing; John S Gottdiener; John F Quigley; Mark O'Callahan; Albert A DelNegro; Ted D Friehling; Pamela Karasik; Sonia Suchday; Joseph Levine; Richard L Verrier Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-03-22 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Matthew T Mefford; Murray A Mittleman; Bonnie H Li; Lei X Qian; Kristi Reynolds; Hui Zhou; Teresa N Harrison; Alan C Geller; Stephen Sidney; Richard P Sloan; Elizabeth Mostofsky; David R Williams Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2020-10-12 Impact factor: 11.205