preprints.org > medicine and pharmacology > cardiac and cardiovascular systems > doi: 10.20944/preprints202404.0842.v1

Preprint Article Version 1 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

Version 1 : Received: 11 April 2024 / Approved: 12 April 2024 / Online: 12 April 2024 (09:54:01 CEST)

Background: the study aimed at comparing the prognostic importance of Heart Rate (HR) and of QT corrected (QTc) according to Fridericia, Framingham and Bazett methods, in a large non-selected population. Methods: the analysis of digital Electrocardiograms archived from 2008 to 2022 in the metropolitan area of Modena, Italy, was made. The population under study was divided into three age-groups and survival analysis was performed. Results: 131.627 patients were enrolled and during the follow-up (mean 1641.4 days), all-cause mortality was 8.9%. Both HR and QTc were associated with mortality. All-cause mortality significantly increased from HR values greater than 81 BPM and from QTc values greater than 440 msec in young subjects and 455 msec in old subjects (values of the 75th percentiles/optimal operating point). Cox analysis confirmed the better prognostic value of Bazett’s QTc and of HR in the whole population and in the three age-groups. Conclusion: Bazett’s method performed better than other methods but unexpectedly HR had the same or a better correlation with all-cause mortality. Since HR is simple and readily available, its evaluation should be improved. However, reference values for QTc and for HR are difficult to define causing many confounding factors and further population-study are required.

electrocardiogram; QT corrected; Bazett; heart rate; all-cause death; mortality

Medicine and Pharmacology, Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems

* All users must log in before leaving a comment