Does QT dispersion measurement have practical utility in clinical decision-making?
The acceptance of QT dispersion as a useful clinical test faces serious obstacles due to lack of standardization, specificity, and proven prognostic value.
(1) Dispersion of QT intervals is the difference between the longest and the shortest QT interval in the ECG. Owing to the relative ease of measurement and the perceived need for new markers of arrhythmogenicity, the method has attracted the interest of clinical investigators but has not reached the level of practical utility. (2) It is postulated that to pass the test of practical utility, the method must meet the following criteria: (a) standardization; (b) establishment of normal values; (c) established sensitivity and/or specificity for diagnosis and/or prognosis; and (d) uniqueness of relevant information. (3) Analysis of the data from the literature suggests that standardization of the method and the range of normal values have not been established, and that the method lacks specificity for separating healthy persons from patients with heart disease. (4) Large values, such as average QT dispersion > 65 msec, have been found predominantly in patients with serious, life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias, and the largest values, i.e., > 110 msec in patients with congenital long QT syndrome. (5) The prognostic value of QT dispersion has been disputed, and the uniqueness of the relevant information has not been tested. (6) It is concluded that the acceptance of QT dispersion as a useful test in practice faces manifold and serious obstacles. It remains to be established whether these obstacles are insurmountable.
Borys Surawicz (Thu,) studied this question.