| Literature DB >> 34295860 |
Cheng Tan1,2, Xiuying Yi2, Ying Chen1,2, Shuangshuang Wang1,2, Qing Ji2, Fang Li1, Yuwen Wang1, Runmei Zou1, Cheng Wang1.
Abstract
Objectives: Electrocardiogram (ECG) can be affected by autonomic nerves with body position changes. The study aims to explore the ECG changes of children with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) when their posture changes. Materials and methods: Sixty-four children diagnosed with DCM were recruited as research group and 55 healthy children as control group. T-wave amplitude and QT interval in ECG were recorded, and their differences between supine and orthostatic ECG were compared in both groups. Subsequently, the children with DCM were followed up and the differences before and after treatment compared.Entities:
Keywords: children; dilated cardiomyopathy; electrocardiography; orthostatic position; supine position
Year: 2021 PMID: 34295860 PMCID: PMC8290918 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2021.680923
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pediatr ISSN: 2296-2360 Impact factor: 3.418
Figure 1The comparisons of T-wave amplitude and QT interval between supine and orthostatic ECG. (A) The T-wave amplitude in the control group. (B) The QT interval in the control group. (C) The T-wave amplitude in the research group. (D) The QT interval in the research group. *P < 0.05.
Figure 2The comparisons of T-wave amplitude and QT interval between control group and research group. (A) The T-wave amplitude in the supine ECG. (B) The QT interval in the supine ECG. (C) The T-wave amplitude in the orthostatic ECG. (D) The QT interval in the orthostatic ECG.*P < 0.05.
Figure 3The comparisons of differences of T-wave amplitude and QT interval between supine and orthostatic ECG. (A) The differences of T-wave amplitude. (B) The differences of QT interval.*P < 0.05.
Logistic regression analysis of T-wave amplitude differences in leads II and III, aVF, and V5 and QT interval differences in lead II, aVL, aVF, and V5.
| II | 3.976 | 1.707 | 0.191 | 53.316 |
| III | −8.307 | 7.914 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| aVF | 3.392 | 0.672 | 0.412 | 29.740 |
| V5 | −3.049 | 3.159 | 0.076 | 0.047 |
| II | −0.014 | 2.908 | 0.088 | 0.986 |
| aVL | −0.025 | 3.884 | 0.049 | 0.976 |
| aVF | 0.006 | 0.31 | 0.578 | 1.006 |
| V5 | −0.009 | 0.776 | 0.378 | 0.991 |
Figure 4The ROC curve of predictive value on DCM diagnosis. (A) The difference of T-wave amplitude in lead III. (B) The difference of QT interval in lead aVL.
Figure 5The comparisons before and after treatment. (A) The cardiac function in the non-response group. (B) The cardiac function in the response group. (C) The differences of T-wave amplitude in the non-response group. (D) The differences of QT interval in the non-response group. (E) The differences of T-wave amplitude in the response group. (F) The differences of QT interval in the response group.*P < 0.05.
Figure 6The ROC curve of predictive values on DCM prognosis. (A) The difference of T-wave amplitude difference in lead aVR before and after treatment. (B) The difference of QT interval difference in lead V6 before and after treatment.