Why the study?
Arrhythmias are one of the most common causes of mortality in patients with acute ischemic stroke, but the relationships between ECG arrhythmia susceptibility markers and stroke characteristics remain to be clarified.
Do ECG arrhythmia susceptibility markers differ in patients with acute ischemic stroke compared to controls and correlate with stroke severity?
Do ECG arrhythmia susceptibility markers differ in patients with acute ischemic stroke compared to controls and correlate with stroke severity?
ECG arrhythmia susceptibility markers such as QT, QTc, and Tpe intervals are altered in acute ischemic stroke patients and may be useful for cardiac monitoring.
May support enhanced cardiac monitoring in AIS; leaves open correlation with severity and prognostic value.
INTRODUCTION: Arrhythmias are one of the most common causes of mortality in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). This study aimed to investigate the relationships of arrhythmia susceptibility markers (QT, QTc, Tpe, Tpe-D, Tpe/QT, and Tpe/QTc) with the localization and volume of the ischemic area, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores, and troponin levels in AIS. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with AIS in the emergency department in the period from 01 November 2016 to 31 March 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients admitted to the emergency department with no pathological ECG findings were included. The measurements of QT, QTc, Tpe, Tpe-D, Tpe/QTc, and Tpe/QT were performed under a digital microscope. The NIHSS scores, troponin values, and the ischemic area volume based on the diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging findings at the time of admission were found. RESULTS: =0.480, 0.688, 0.663, 0.512, 0.333, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Arrhythmia susceptibility markers including QT, QTc, Tpe, the values of Tpe-D, Tpe/QT, and Tpe/QTc are different in AIS patients compared to the individuals in the control group; therefore, these parameters can be included among the other parameters of close cardiac monitoring.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bılge et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: