Open AccessOptimal QT/JT Interval Assessment in Patients with Complete Bundle Branch Block
Author(s) -
Chiladakis John,
Kalogeropoulos Andreas,
Koutsogiannis Nikolaos,
Zagkli Fani,
Vlassopoulou Niki,
Chouchoulis Konstantinos,
Alexopoulos Dimitrios
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
annals of noninvasive electrocardiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.494
H-Index - 48
eISSN - 1542-474X
pISSN - 1082-720X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1542-474x.2012.00528.x
Subject(s) - medicine , qt interval , cardiology , amiodarone , heart rate , nomogram , repolarization , framingham risk score , heart block , bundle branch block , heart disease , framingham heart study , electrocardiography , confidence interval , ventricular repolarization , atrial fibrillation , blood pressure , disease , electrophysiology
Background: Prolonged ventricular repolarization duration confers increased risk for malignant ventricular arrhythmias. We sought to clarify the optimal method of QT/JT interval assessment in patients with complete bundle branch block (BBB). Methods: Study patients (n = 71) were dual‐chamber device recipients with baseline left or right BBB who preserved intrinsic ventricular activation during incremental atrial pacing. Patients were classified according to the presence or not of structural heart disease. The former group received chronic amiodarone therapy. QT and JT intervals were recorded at baseline heart rate of 51 ± 4 beats/min and during atrial pacing at 60, 80, and 100 beats/min. We used linear mixed‐effects models to assess the effect of heart rate on the derived QTc and JTc values with the use of six different heart rate correction formulae. Results: Heart rate had a significant effect on the QTc and the JTc intervals regardless of the correction formula used (P < 0.001 for all formulae). The formula of Hodges demonstrated the least variability in QTc and JTc measurements across the different heart rates in both patients groups without (F = 15.05 and F = 13.53, respectively) and with structural heart disease (F = 5.71 and F = 7.69, respectively), followed by the Nomogram and Framingham methods, whereas the uncorrected QT and JT intervals showed comparable heart rate–dependency. The application of Bazett's JTc and QTc led to the most pronounced interval variations in any case with BBB. Conclusions: The Hodges, Nomogram and Framingham correction methods provide best assessment of QT/JT intervals in BBB, whereas Bazett's formula exaggerates heart rate–dependency of ventricular repolarization intervals.