Intraoperative QTc interval interpretation: Effects of anaesthesia, ECG, correction formulae, sex, and current limits

Thomas Krönauer,Lorenz L. Mihatsch,Patrick Friederich
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14515
2024-09-27
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
Abstract:Background Severe QT interval prolongation requires monitoring QTc intervals during anaesthesia with recommended therapeutic interventions at a threshold of 500 ms. The need for 12‐lead ECG and lack of standardisation limit such monitoring. We determined whether automated continuous intraoperative QTc monitoring with 5‐lead ECG measures QTc intervals comparable to 12‐lead ECG and whether the interpretation of QTc intervals depends on the correction formulae and the patient's sex. We compared intraoperative QTc times to QTc times from resting ECGs of a population from the same region, to substantiate the hypothesis that patients under general anaesthesia may need specific treatment thresholds. Methods In this prospective observational study, intraoperative QT/QTc intervals were automatically recorded using 12 and 5‐lead ECG in 100 patients (44% males). QTc values were analysed for sex and formula‐specific aspects after correction for heart rate according to Bazett, Fridericia, Hodges, Framingham, Charbit and QTcRAS, and compared to a regional community‐based cohort. The level of significance was set to α = 0.05. Results QT interval duration was not significantly different between 12‐lead and 5‐lead ECG (difference − 0.09 ms ± 8.5 ms, p = 0.793). The QTc interval duration significantly differed between the correction formulae (p 500 ms significantly depended on the correction formula (p
anesthesiology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?