Ömer Sen1, Samet Yilmaz2, Fatih Sen3, Kevser G Balcı3, Mehmet K Akboga3, Cagrı Yayla3, Özcan Özeke3. 1. Cardiology Clinic, Adana Numune Training and Research Hospital, Adana, Turkey. 2. Cardiovascular Department, Yozgat State Hospital, Yozgatand, Turkey. 3. Cardiology Clinic, Turkey Yuksek Ihtisas Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: T-wave peak to T-wave end interval (Tp-e) correlates with dispersion of ventricular repolarization. The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of Tp-e to predict appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks and all-cause mortality in patients who underwent ICD implantation for primary prophylaxis. METHODS: Two hundred twenty-eight patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% and an ICD implanted were followed-up prospectively. Patients divided into two subgroups according to presence of appropriate ICD shocks (Group 1: 112 patients with ICD shocks, Group 2: 116 patients without shocks). End points were appropriate ICD therapy due to ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF), death, and a combined end point of VT/VF or death. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 22.3 ± 7.7 months, appropriate ICD shocks were observed in 112 of 228 patients (49.1%). The mean duration of the Tp-e Group 1 was significantly longer than Group 2 (115.3 ± 22.2 vs 104.7 ± 20.2 ms, P < 0.001). Ischemic etiology and Tp-e duration were found to be independent predictors of ICD therapy. When the patients were divided into two groups based on Tp-e interval, there was no significant difference regarding the mortality between groups (21.2% vs 21.8%, P: 0.186). However, appropriate ICD shocks due to VT/VF (37.5% vs 58.8%, P < 0.001) and combined end point (39.4% vs 64.5%, P: 0.002) were significantly higher in patients with longer Tp-e group. CONCLUSIONS: Tp-e interval independently predicts appropriate ICD shocks in patients with systolic dysfunction and ICDs implanted for primary prevention.
BACKGROUND: T-wave peak to T-wave end interval (Tp-e) correlates with dispersion of ventricular repolarization. The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of Tp-e to predict appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks and all-cause mortality in patients who underwent ICD implantation for primary prophylaxis. METHODS: Two hundred twenty-eight patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% and an ICD implanted were followed-up prospectively. Patients divided into two subgroups according to presence of appropriate ICD shocks (Group 1: 112 patients with ICD shocks, Group 2: 116 patients without shocks). End points were appropriate ICD therapy due to ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF), death, and a combined end point of VT/VF or death. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 22.3 ± 7.7 months, appropriate ICD shocks were observed in 112 of 228 patients (49.1%). The mean duration of the Tp-e Group 1 was significantly longer than Group 2 (115.3 ± 22.2 vs 104.7 ± 20.2 ms, P < 0.001). Ischemic etiology and Tp-e duration were found to be independent predictors of ICD therapy. When the patients were divided into two groups based on Tp-e interval, there was no significant difference regarding the mortality between groups (21.2% vs 21.8%, P: 0.186). However, appropriate ICD shocks due to VT/VF (37.5% vs 58.8%, P < 0.001) and combined end point (39.4% vs 64.5%, P: 0.002) were significantly higher in patients with longer Tp-e group. CONCLUSIONS: Tp-e interval independently predicts appropriate ICD shocks in patients with systolic dysfunction and ICDs implanted for primary prevention.
Authors: Leon Dinshaw; Julia Münch; Jannis Dickow; Susanne Lezius; Stephan Willems; Boris A Hoffmann; Monica Patten Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2017-09-30 Impact factor: 5.460