We have located links that may give you full text access.
The role of baseline and post-procedural frontal plane QRS-T angles for cardiac risk assessment in patients with acute STEMI.
Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology 2018 September
BACKGROUND: To our knowledge, no study so far investigated the importance of post-procedural frontal QRS-T angle f(QRS-T) in ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The aim of our study was to investigate the role of baseline and post-procedural f(QRS-T) angles for determining high risk STEMI patients, and the success of reperfusion.
METHODS: A total of 248 patients with first acute STEMI that underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) or thrombolytic therapy (TT) between 2013 and 2014 were included in this study. Baseline f(QRS-T) angle was defined as the angle which measured from the first ECG at the time of hospital admission. Post-procedural (QRS-T) angle was defined according to the treatment strategy as follows: the angle which measured from the post-PCI ECG in patients treated with pPCI; the angle which measured from the ECG taken 90 min after onset of therapy in patients treated with TT.
RESULTS: The baseline (101.9° ± 48.0 vs. 72.1° ± 49.1, p = 0.014) and post-procedural f(QRS-T) angles (95.7° ± 48.1 vs. 58.1° ± 47.1, p = 0.002) were significantly higher in patients who developed in-hospital mortality than the patients who did not develop in-hospital mortality. Also, f(QRS-T) angle measured at 90 min was significantly lower in patients with successful thrombolysis group compared to failed thrombolysis group (53.2° ± 42.8 vs. 77.3° ± 52.9, p = 0.033), whereas baseline f(QRS-T) angle was similar between two groups (78.6° ± 53.4 vs. 78.9° ± 54.0, p = 0.976). Multivariate analysis showed that post-procedural f(QRS-T) angle ≥89.6° (odds ratio: 3.541, 95% confidence interval: 1.235-10.154, p = 0.019), but not baseline f(QRS-T) angle, was independent predictor of in-hospital mortality.
CONCLUSION: f(QRS-T) angle may be used as a beneficial tool for determining high risk patients in acute STEMI. Unlike previous studies, we showed for the first time that that post-procedural f(QRS-T) can predict in-hospital mortality and TT failure.
METHODS: A total of 248 patients with first acute STEMI that underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) or thrombolytic therapy (TT) between 2013 and 2014 were included in this study. Baseline f(QRS-T) angle was defined as the angle which measured from the first ECG at the time of hospital admission. Post-procedural (QRS-T) angle was defined according to the treatment strategy as follows: the angle which measured from the post-PCI ECG in patients treated with pPCI; the angle which measured from the ECG taken 90 min after onset of therapy in patients treated with TT.
RESULTS: The baseline (101.9° ± 48.0 vs. 72.1° ± 49.1, p = 0.014) and post-procedural f(QRS-T) angles (95.7° ± 48.1 vs. 58.1° ± 47.1, p = 0.002) were significantly higher in patients who developed in-hospital mortality than the patients who did not develop in-hospital mortality. Also, f(QRS-T) angle measured at 90 min was significantly lower in patients with successful thrombolysis group compared to failed thrombolysis group (53.2° ± 42.8 vs. 77.3° ± 52.9, p = 0.033), whereas baseline f(QRS-T) angle was similar between two groups (78.6° ± 53.4 vs. 78.9° ± 54.0, p = 0.976). Multivariate analysis showed that post-procedural f(QRS-T) angle ≥89.6° (odds ratio: 3.541, 95% confidence interval: 1.235-10.154, p = 0.019), but not baseline f(QRS-T) angle, was independent predictor of in-hospital mortality.
CONCLUSION: f(QRS-T) angle may be used as a beneficial tool for determining high risk patients in acute STEMI. Unlike previous studies, we showed for the first time that that post-procedural f(QRS-T) can predict in-hospital mortality and TT failure.
Full text links
Related Resources
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