The optimal QTc selection in patients of acute myocardial infarction with poor perioperative prognosis

BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2023 Nov 10;23(1):551. doi: 10.1186/s12872-023-03594-0.

Abstract

Background: The predictive utility of QTc values, calculated through various correction formulas for the incidence of postoperative major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in patients experiencing acute myocardial infarction (AMI), warrants further exploration. This study endeavors to ascertain the predictive accuracy of disparate QTc values for MACCE occurrences in patients with perioperative AMI.

Methods: A retrospective cohort of three hundred fourteen AMI patients, comprising 81 instances of in-hospital MACCE and 233 controls, was assembled, with comprehensive collection of baseline demographic and clinical data. QTc values were derived employing the correction formulas of Bazett, Fridericia, Hodges, Ashman, Framingham, Schlamowitz, Dmitrienko, Rautaharju, and Sarma. Analytical methods encompassed comparative statistics, Spearman correlation analysis, binary logistic regression models, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA).

Results: QTc values were significantly elevated in the MACCE cohort compared to controls (P < 0.05). Spearman's correlation analysis between heart rate and QTc revealed a modest positive correlation for the Sarma formula (QTcBaz) (ρ = 0.46, P < 0.001). Within the multifactorial binary logistic regression, each QTc variant emerged as an independent risk factor for MACCE, with the Sarma formula-derived QTc (QTcSar) presenting the highest hazard ratio (OR = 1.025). ROC curve analysis identified QTcSar with a threshold of 446 ms as yielding the superior predictive capacity (AUC = 0.734), demonstrating a sensitivity of 60.5% and a specificity of 82.8%. DCA indicated positive net benefits for QTcSar at high-risk thresholds ranging from 0 to 0.66 and 0.71-0.96, with QTcBaz, prevalent in clinical settings, showing positive net benefits at thresholds extending to 0-0.99.

Conclusion: For perioperative AMI patients, QTcSar proves more advantageous in monitoring QTc intervals compared to alternative QT correction formulas, offering enhanced predictive prowess for subsequent MACCE incidents.

Keywords: AMI; Acute Myocardial Infarction; Correction formula; ECG; MACCE; QTc.

MeSH terms

  • Electrocardiography* / methods
  • Heart Rate / physiology
  • Humans
  • Myocardial Infarction* / diagnosis
  • Myocardial Infarction* / etiology
  • Prognosis
  • Retrospective Studies