We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
Use of fragmented QRS in prognosticating clinical deterioration and mortality in pulmonary embolism: A meta-analysis.
Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology 2018 September
BACKGROUND: Fragmented QRS (fQRS) on electrocardiography is potentially valuable in prognosticating acute pulmonary embolism (PE). ECG is one of the first tests performed in the emergency department, quickly interpretable, noninvasive, inexpensive, and available in remote areas. We aimed to review fQRS's role in PE prognostication.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science, abstracts, conference proceedings, and reference lists until October 2017. Eligible studies used fQRS to prognosticate patients for the main outcomes of death and clinical deterioration or escalation of therapy. Two authors independently selected studies, with disagreement resolved by consensus. Ad hoc piloted forms were used to extract data and assess risk of bias. We used a random-effects model to pool relevant data in meta-analysis with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), while all other data were synthesized qualitatively. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 index.
RESULTS: We included five studies (1,165 patients). There was complete agreement in study selection. fQRS significantly predicted in-hospital mortality (OR [95% CI], 2.92 [1.73-4.91]; p < .001), cardiogenic shock (OR [95% CI], 4.71 [1.61-13.70]; p = .005), and total mortality at 2-year follow-up (OR [95% CI], 4.42 [2.57-7.60]; p < .001). Adjusted analyses were generally consistent with these results.
CONCLUSION: Although few studies have explored the current study's question, they showed that fQRS is potentially valuable in PE prognostication. fQRS should be considered as an entry, along with other clinical and ECG findings, in a PE risk score.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science, abstracts, conference proceedings, and reference lists until October 2017. Eligible studies used fQRS to prognosticate patients for the main outcomes of death and clinical deterioration or escalation of therapy. Two authors independently selected studies, with disagreement resolved by consensus. Ad hoc piloted forms were used to extract data and assess risk of bias. We used a random-effects model to pool relevant data in meta-analysis with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), while all other data were synthesized qualitatively. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 index.
RESULTS: We included five studies (1,165 patients). There was complete agreement in study selection. fQRS significantly predicted in-hospital mortality (OR [95% CI], 2.92 [1.73-4.91]; p < .001), cardiogenic shock (OR [95% CI], 4.71 [1.61-13.70]; p = .005), and total mortality at 2-year follow-up (OR [95% CI], 4.42 [2.57-7.60]; p < .001). Adjusted analyses were generally consistent with these results.
CONCLUSION: Although few studies have explored the current study's question, they showed that fQRS is potentially valuable in PE prognostication. fQRS should be considered as an entry, along with other clinical and ECG findings, in a PE risk score.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app