| Literature DB >> 33357637 |
Esmaeil Mehraeen1, Seyed Ahmad Seyed Alinaghi2, Ali Nowroozi3, Omid Dadras4, Sanam Alilou5, Parnian Shobeiri6, Farzane Behnezhad7, Amirali Karimi8.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Since the epidemic of COVID-19 attracted the attention, reports were surrounding electrocardiographic changes in the infected individuals. We aimed at pinpointing different observed ECG findings and discussing their clinical significance.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Electrocardiography; SARS-CoV-2
Year: 2020 PMID: 33357637 PMCID: PMC7661958 DOI: 10.1016/j.ihj.2020.11.007
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Indian Heart J ISSN: 0019-4832
Fig. 1PRISMA flow diagram of identified articles.
Description of the included studies in the drug-induced group.
| ID | First author (reference) | Type of study | Country | Study Population | Study Purpose | ECG findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Borba MGS | Randomized clinical trial | Brazil | 81 patients (male = 60, female = 21) mean age = 51.1y | To evaluate the efficacy and safety of chloroquine in patients with severe COVID-19. | prolongation of the QTcF QTc interval >500 ms:high-dosage group: 7 of 37 [18.9%], low-dosage group: 4 of 36 [11.1%] |
| 2 | van den Broek MPH | Retrospective cohort study | Netherlands | 95 patients (Male = 66%) | To evaluate Chloroquine-induced QTc prolongation in COVID-19 patients | QTc prolongation (mean = 35 ms (95%CI 28–43 ms) using computerized interpretation and 34 ms (95% CI 25–43 ms) using manual interpretation) No TdP∗ QTc more th-an 500 ms in 22 patients (23%) during chloroquine treatment, with no records of prolonged QTc interval prior to the applying medication ( |
| 3 | Mercuro NJ | Cohort | USA | 90 COVID-19 positive patients treated with hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin (male = 46 (51.1%), female = 44 (48.9%)) | Risk of drug-induced QT interval prolongation | QTc prolongation: Median increase in QTc = 21 (1–39) ms: 5.5 (−14 to 31) ms in monotherapy, 23 (10–40) ms in combination therapy, p = 0.03 QTc increase in: critically ill = 26.5, 10 had≥60 ms increase in QTc after treatment (3 in monotherapy, 7 in combination therapy) 18 had≥500 ms (prolonged) QTc after treatment (7 in monotherapy, 11 in combination therapy) QTc ≥ 500 ms after treatment in: loop diuretic = 12 out of 39, no loop diuretic = 6 out of 51, likelihood p = 0.03 QTc ≥ 500 ms after treatment in: patients with baseline QTc ≥ 450 ms: 15 out of 50, patients with baseline QTc< 450 ms: 3 out of 40, likelihood p = 0.008 Loop diuretic and baseline QTc ≥ 450 ms remained independent for post-treatment prolonged QTc after controlling for 2 or more Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome criteria Age, sex, simultaneous QTc prolonging drugs and comorbidities were not correlated with post-treatment prolonged QTc 10/90 stopped hydroxychloroquine before 5 days of treatment due to QTc prolongation PVC∗ (possibly due to hydroxychloroquine) RBBB∗ (possibly due to hydroxychloroquine) TdP (1 case, 3 days after hydroxycholoroquine + azithromycin discontinuation due to 499 ms QTc) which later developed other ventricular arrhythmias and was treated with lidocaine |
| 4 | Bessiere F | Case series | France | 40 COVID-19 positive patients (male = 32 (80%), female = 8 (20%)) | Assessment of QT interval in COVID-19 treated with hydroxychloroquine and +azithromycin | QT prolongation: 37 patients after antiviral therapy 14 prolonged QTc after 2–5 days of antiviral therapy: 10 ΔQTc> 60 ms, 7 QTc ≥ 500 ms (1 in monotherapy, 6 in combination therapy, p = 0.03) Antiviral therapy stopped in 17 patients: 7 because of ECG changes, 10 because of acute renal failure |
| 5 | Saleh M | Prospective observational study | USA | 201 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (male = 115 (57.2%), female = 86 (42.8%)) | Effects of chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and azithromycin on QTc of COVID-19 patients | Baseline ECG: 46 had intraventricular conduction delay, incomplete or complete RBBB, LBBB∗ or a ventricular paced rhythm – mean QTc = 439.5 ± 24.8 ms, 8 patients had > 500 msQTc QTc prolongation: Mean maximum QTc during cohort = 463.3 ± 42.6 ms: 453.3 ± 37.0 ms in monotherapy, 470.4 ± 45.0 in combination therapy, p = 0.004) Mean change from baseline to max QTc: 32.8 ± 28.6 ms in monotherapy, 41.6 ± 42.7 in combination therapy, p = 0.19 Average post-treatment QTc = 454.8 ± 40.1 ms ( Average QTc increase after 5 days of treatment = 19.33 ± 42.1 ms: 3.9 ± 32.9 in monotherapy, 27.5 ± 44.3 in combination therapy, p < 0.001 18 had peak QTc> 500 ms: 7 in monotherapy, 11 in combination therapy, p = 1.00 7 discontinue hydroxy due to QTc prolongation 2 patients required lidocaine to continue hydroxychloroquine: 1 had QTc increase from 458 to 594 ms => IV lidocaine =>QTc reduced to 479 ms => azithromycin discontinued, hydroxychloroquine continued for full 5 day course =>A-fib∗ and acute hypoxic respiratory failure 2 days prior to peak QTc => IV amiodarone. 2 days after finishing hydroxychloroquineQTc = 601 ms (maybe because of furosemide and pantoprazole => IV lidocaine =>QTc = 551 ms =>QTc< 500 ms – the other patient had increased QTc (456 ms–620 ms) after 1 dose of hydroxychloroquine => IV lidocaine =>QTc improved to 550 ms => no further QTc prolongation New-onset A-fib: 17 patients Non-sustained monomorphic V-tach: 7 patients Sustained monomorphic V-tach: 1 patient |
| 6 | Chorin, E. | Consecutive cohort | USA | 84 patients with COVID 19 administered hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as treatment | Evaluation of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin effect on QTc prolongation in patients with COVID-19 | Prolongation of the QTc from a baseline average of 435 ± 24 ms to a maximal average value of 463 ± 32 ms ( In ECG documents of 11% of patients, severe QTc prolongation was observed QTc increased from a baseline average of 447 ± 30 ms to 527 ± 17 ms ( No TdP (even in severely prolonged QTc cases) Four patients died from multi-organ failure (no arrhythmia or severe QTc prolongation was noted) |
∗Abbreviations: TdP (Torsades de pointes),RBBB/LBBB (right/left bundle branch block), PVC (premature ventricular contraction), A-fib (atrial fibrillation).
Description of the included studies in the non-drug-induced group.
| ID | First author (reference) | Type of study | Country | Study Population | Study Purpose | ECG findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Shao F | Retrospective observational study | China | 136 patients (female = 46, male = 90 | To describe characteristics and outcomes in severe COVID-19 patients with cardiac arrest | Initial rhythms: 8 (5.9%)V-fib∗/V-tach∗, 6 (4.4%) PEA∗, 122 (89.7%) asystole Patients monitored prior to IHCA∗:93.4% ROSC∗ achieved patients:75% of patients with V-fib or pulseless V-tach, 9% of asystole group |
| 2 | Deng Q | Retrospective | China | 112 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (male = 57 (50.9%), female = 55 (49.1%)) | Description of findings – suspected myocardial injury | ECG abnormality definition: ST-T changes 22 patients with ECG abnormality (2 in suspected myocarditis group (n = 14)): 7 in non-severe disease group (n = 45), 15 in severe disease group (n = 67), p = 0.37 ECG changes generally non-specific Typical ECG signs absent, suggesting myocardial injury as a result of systemic effects of the illness instead of the virus itself ST-segment changes or Abnormal ST-T changes: 9 patients LAD∗: 4 patients Q wave in inferior leads: 1 patient |
| 3 | Bangalore S | Case series | USA | 18 COVID-19 positive patients with ST-elevation on ECG (male = 15 (83%), female = 3 (17%)) | Findings description | ST-elevation: |
| 4 | Cai XQ | Case report | China | A 60-year-old male | Clinical manifestations of a COVID 19 patient with a myocardial infection | ST elevation in leads II, III, and aVF ST depression in leads V1–V6 severe ischemia in the inferior wall (leads II, III, and aVF) |
| 5 | Loghin C | Case report | USA | A 29-year-old male | Clinical features of Pseudo acute myocardial infarction in a young COVID-19 patient | Sinus tachycardia Marked RAD∗ ST elevation in leads II, III, aVF, and V6 (Inferior leads) |
| 6 | Dabbagh MF | Case report | USA | A 67-year-old female | Development of Cardiac Tamponade and Takotsubo cardiomyopathy in a COVID-19 patient | Low voltage in limb leads Non-specific ST changes Deep T wave inversion in precordial leads |
| 7 | Vidovich MI | Case report | USA | A 61-year-old male | Finding Transient Brugada-like ECG pattern in a COVID-19 patient | Brugada-type pattern in the right precordial leads ST elevation in the right precordial leads |
| 8 | He J | Case report | China | Patient 1: | ECG and cardiac manifestations in 2 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 | Patient 1 (sequence of events): Sinus rhythm with first-degree AV∗ block Sinus tachycardia, first-degree AV block with S1Q3T3 Mobitz type 1 s-degree AV block and atrioventricularjunctional escape beat High-grade (nearly complete) AV block with a junctional escape rhythm First-degree AV block and recovery from S1Q3T3 Sinus tachycardia with incomplete RBBB∗ Slight ST elevation V-tach V-tach and ventricular fusion Remarkable ST elevation in the form of a triangular QRS-ST-T waveform (in inferior and precordial leads). |
| 9 | Minhas AS | Case report | USA | A 58-year-old female | Clinical manifestations and outcomes of a patient with stress cardiomyopathy or Takotsubo cardiomyopathy in a COVID-19 patient | Sinus tachycardia and 1 mm upsloping ST elevations in leads I and aVL Mild diffuse PR depressions and diffuse ST-T changes |
| 10 | Casey K | Case report | USA | A 42-year-old COVID-19 positive male | Case report – acute segmental pulmonary emboli | T wave flattening in inferior leads RAD S1Q3T3 |
| 11 | Inciardi RM | Case report | Italy | A 53-year-old white woman | Case report – cardiac involvement | Low voltage in limb leads Minimal diffuse ST elevation (most prominent in inferior and lateral leads) ST depression and T inversion in aVR and V1 |
| 12 | Chang D | Case report | USA | A 49-year-old Bangladeshi man after an episode of syncope | Brugada syndrome in a COVID-19 patient | ST-elevation on first ECG Brugada syndrome upon fever development |
| 13 | Doyen D | Case report | France | A 69-year-old man from Italy presented with ARDS | Myocarditis in a COVID-19 patient | LVH∗ (probably due to hypertension) Diffuse T inversion |
| 14 | Cizgici AY | Case report | Turkey | A 78-year-old hypertensive patient | Myopericarditis in a COVID-19 patient | Concave ST elevation (except aVR) without reciprocal changes A-fib∗ |
∗Abbreviations: V-fib (ventricular fibrillation), V-tach (ventricular tachycardia), PEA (pulseless electrical activity), IHCA (in-hospital cardiac arrest), ROSC (restoration of spontaneous circulation), LAD/RAD (left/right axis deviation), RBBB (right bundle branch block), A-fib (atrial fibrillation), AV (atrioventricular), LVH (left ventricular hypertrophy).
Fig. 2Age distributions of included studies.