QT correction in atrial fibrillation – Measurement revisited

Aditee Dash, Cyril Torado, Nieman Paw, Dali Fan, Nayereh G Pezeshkian, Uma N Srivatsa

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: QT interval measured in the electrocardiogram (ECG) varies with RR interval challenging the calculation of corrected QT (QTc) in Atrial fibrillation (AF). Objectives: To identify the ideal Lead, number of complexes and the formula to measure QTc that correlates best between AF and sinus rhythm (SR). Procedure: We identified ECGs from patients with AF before and after conversion to SR. After excluding patients on drugs and clinical conditions that prolong QT interval, QTc was calculated from all the leads using the formulae: Bazett (BF), Fridericia (FF), Framingham(FrF), Hodges (HF), Saige (SF) and Rautaharju (RF) during AF and SR. After identifying the lead with best linear correlation, we calculated QTc following the longest RR, multiple QRS complexes and average automated RR interval during AF and compared to SR. Findings: In 52 patients (male 69%, age 63 ± 9 yrs), QTc measured from Lead II correlated best with SR in majority of the formulae. QTc was consistently shorter with linear formulae. While BF overestimated QTc, FF was optimal comparing AF vs SR (416 ± 33 vs 411 ± 38 ms, ns) calculated from single, multiple or average automated RR interval. Bland Altman analysis of the average automated QTc versus the delta of individual automated QTcs shows the least variation in the QTc calculated by FF. Conclusions: BF in commercial software is not ideal for measurement of QTc in AF, Fridericia Formula in lead II from the average RR from automated ECG measurement maybe utilized for the calculation of QTc.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)70-76
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Electrocardiology
Volume56
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2019

Fingerprint

Atrial Fibrillation
Electrocardiography
Software
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Lead

Keywords

  • Atrial fibrillation
  • QT interval correction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

QT correction in atrial fibrillation – Measurement revisited. / Dash, Aditee; Torado, Cyril; Paw, Nieman; Fan, Dali; Pezeshkian, Nayereh G; Srivatsa, Uma N.

In: Journal of Electrocardiology, Vol. 56, 01.09.2019, p. 70-76.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a97a7abf94c1488d9a3d52290ff8aa78,
title = "QT correction in atrial fibrillation – Measurement revisited",
abstract = "Background: QT interval measured in the electrocardiogram (ECG) varies with RR interval challenging the calculation of corrected QT (QTc) in Atrial fibrillation (AF). Objectives: To identify the ideal Lead, number of complexes and the formula to measure QTc that correlates best between AF and sinus rhythm (SR). Procedure: We identified ECGs from patients with AF before and after conversion to SR. After excluding patients on drugs and clinical conditions that prolong QT interval, QTc was calculated from all the leads using the formulae: Bazett (BF), Fridericia (FF), Framingham(FrF), Hodges (HF), Saige (SF) and Rautaharju (RF) during AF and SR. After identifying the lead with best linear correlation, we calculated QTc following the longest RR, multiple QRS complexes and average automated RR interval during AF and compared to SR. Findings: In 52 patients (male 69{\%}, age 63 ± 9 yrs), QTc measured from Lead II correlated best with SR in majority of the formulae. QTc was consistently shorter with linear formulae. While BF overestimated QTc, FF was optimal comparing AF vs SR (416 ± 33 vs 411 ± 38 ms, ns) calculated from single, multiple or average automated RR interval. Bland Altman analysis of the average automated QTc versus the delta of individual automated QTcs shows the least variation in the QTc calculated by FF. Conclusions: BF in commercial software is not ideal for measurement of QTc in AF, Fridericia Formula in lead II from the average RR from automated ECG measurement maybe utilized for the calculation of QTc.",
keywords = "Atrial fibrillation, QT interval correction",
author = "Aditee Dash and Cyril Torado and Nieman Paw and Dali Fan and Pezeshkian, {Nayereh G} and Srivatsa, {Uma N}",
year = "2019",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2019.06.009",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "56",
pages = "70--76",
journal = "Journal of Electrocardiology",
issn = "0022-0736",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - QT correction in atrial fibrillation – Measurement revisited

AU - Dash, Aditee

AU - Torado, Cyril

AU - Paw, Nieman

AU - Fan, Dali

AU - Pezeshkian, Nayereh G

AU - Srivatsa, Uma N

PY - 2019/9/1

Y1 - 2019/9/1

N2 - Background: QT interval measured in the electrocardiogram (ECG) varies with RR interval challenging the calculation of corrected QT (QTc) in Atrial fibrillation (AF). Objectives: To identify the ideal Lead, number of complexes and the formula to measure QTc that correlates best between AF and sinus rhythm (SR). Procedure: We identified ECGs from patients with AF before and after conversion to SR. After excluding patients on drugs and clinical conditions that prolong QT interval, QTc was calculated from all the leads using the formulae: Bazett (BF), Fridericia (FF), Framingham(FrF), Hodges (HF), Saige (SF) and Rautaharju (RF) during AF and SR. After identifying the lead with best linear correlation, we calculated QTc following the longest RR, multiple QRS complexes and average automated RR interval during AF and compared to SR. Findings: In 52 patients (male 69%, age 63 ± 9 yrs), QTc measured from Lead II correlated best with SR in majority of the formulae. QTc was consistently shorter with linear formulae. While BF overestimated QTc, FF was optimal comparing AF vs SR (416 ± 33 vs 411 ± 38 ms, ns) calculated from single, multiple or average automated RR interval. Bland Altman analysis of the average automated QTc versus the delta of individual automated QTcs shows the least variation in the QTc calculated by FF. Conclusions: BF in commercial software is not ideal for measurement of QTc in AF, Fridericia Formula in lead II from the average RR from automated ECG measurement maybe utilized for the calculation of QTc.

AB - Background: QT interval measured in the electrocardiogram (ECG) varies with RR interval challenging the calculation of corrected QT (QTc) in Atrial fibrillation (AF). Objectives: To identify the ideal Lead, number of complexes and the formula to measure QTc that correlates best between AF and sinus rhythm (SR). Procedure: We identified ECGs from patients with AF before and after conversion to SR. After excluding patients on drugs and clinical conditions that prolong QT interval, QTc was calculated from all the leads using the formulae: Bazett (BF), Fridericia (FF), Framingham(FrF), Hodges (HF), Saige (SF) and Rautaharju (RF) during AF and SR. After identifying the lead with best linear correlation, we calculated QTc following the longest RR, multiple QRS complexes and average automated RR interval during AF and compared to SR. Findings: In 52 patients (male 69%, age 63 ± 9 yrs), QTc measured from Lead II correlated best with SR in majority of the formulae. QTc was consistently shorter with linear formulae. While BF overestimated QTc, FF was optimal comparing AF vs SR (416 ± 33 vs 411 ± 38 ms, ns) calculated from single, multiple or average automated RR interval. Bland Altman analysis of the average automated QTc versus the delta of individual automated QTcs shows the least variation in the QTc calculated by FF. Conclusions: BF in commercial software is not ideal for measurement of QTc in AF, Fridericia Formula in lead II from the average RR from automated ECG measurement maybe utilized for the calculation of QTc.

KW - Atrial fibrillation

KW - QT interval correction

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068996600&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85068996600&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2019.06.009

DO - 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2019.06.009

M3 - Article

C2 - 31325620

AN - SCOPUS:85068996600

VL - 56

SP - 70

EP - 76

JO - Journal of Electrocardiology

JF - Journal of Electrocardiology

SN - 0022-0736

ER -