Home
Scholarly Works
Q waves are the strongest electrocardiographic...
Journal article

Q waves are the strongest electrocardiographic variable associated with primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator benefit: a prospective multicentre study

Abstract

AIM: The association of standard 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) markers with benefits of the primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) has not been determined in the contemporary era. We analysed traditional and novel ECG variables in a large prospective, controlled primary prophylactic ICD population to assess the predictive value of ECG in terms of ICD benefit. METHODS AND RESULTS: Electrocardiograms from 1477 ICD patients and 700 control patients (EU-CERT-ICD; non-randomized, controlled, prospective multicentre study; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02064192), who met ICD implantation criteria but did not receive the device, were analysed. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. In ICD patients, the co-primary outcome of first appropriate shock was used. Mean follow-up time was 2.4 ± 1.1 years to death and 2.3 ± 1.2 years to the first appropriate shock. Pathological Q waves were associated with decreased mortality in ICD patients [hazard ratio (HR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-0.84; P < 0.01] and patients with pathological Q waves had significantly more benefit from ICD (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.21-0.93; P = 0.03). QTc interval increase taken as a continuous variable was associated with both mortality and appropriate shock incidence, but commonly used cut-off values, were not statistically significantly associated with either of the outcomes. CONCLUSION: Pathological Q waves were a strong ECG predictor of ICD benefit in primary prophylactic ICD patients. Excess mortality among Q wave patients seems to be due to arrhythmic death which can be prevented by ICD.

Authors

Pelli A; Junttila MJ; Kenttä TV; Schlögl S; Zabel M; Malik M; Reichlin T; Willems R; Vos MA; Harden M

Journal

EP Europace, Vol. 24, No. 5, pp. 774–783

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Publication Date

May 3, 2022

DOI

10.1093/europace/euab260

ISSN

1099-5129

Contact the Experts team