Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24929625›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of cardiology2014

Usefulness of electrocardiographic QRS/T angles with versus without bundle branch blocks to predict heart failure (from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study).

Zhu-ming Zhang, Pentti M Rautaharju, Ronald J Prineas, Laura Loehr, Wayne Rosamond, Elsayed Z Soliman

Open access · greenAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of cardiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhu-ming ZhangEpidemiological Cardiology Research Center (EPICARE), Department of Epidemiology and Prevention, Division of Public Health Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Electronic address: zmzhang@wakehealth.edu.
Pentti M RautaharjuEpidemiological Cardiology Research Center (EPICARE), Department of Epidemiology and Prevention, Division of Public Health Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Ronald J PrineasEpidemiological Cardiology Research Center (EPICARE), Department of Epidemiology and Prevention, Division of Public Health Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Laura LoehrDepartment of Epidemiology, Galling's School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Wayne RosamondDepartment of Epidemiology, Galling's School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Elsayed Z SolimanEpidemiological Cardiology Research Center (EPICARE), Department of Epidemiology and Prevention, Division of Public Health Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina; Section of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Wake Forest University · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

NHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100005CNHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100005GNHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100005INHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100006CNHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100007CNHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100007INHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100008CNHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100008INHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100009CNHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100009INHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100010CNHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100011CNHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100011INHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100012C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Repolarization abnormalities in the setting of bundle branch blocks (BBB) are generally ignored. We used Cox regression models to determine hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for incident heart failure (HF) associated with wide spatial and frontal QRS/T angle (upper twenty-fifth percentile of each) in men and women with and without BBB. This analysis included 14,478 participants (54.6% women, 26.4% blacks, 377 [2.6%] with BBB) from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study who were free of HF at baseline. Using No-BBB with normal spatial QRS/T angle as the reference group, the risk for HF in multivariable adjusted models was increased 51% for No-BBB with wide spatial QRS/T angle (HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.66), 48% for BBB with normal spatial QRS/T angle (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.88), and the risk for incident HF was increased more than threefold for BBB with wide spatial QRS/T angle (HR 3.37, 95% CI 2.47 to 4.60). The results were consistent across subgroups by gender. Similar results were observed for the frontal plane QRS/T angle. In the pooled BBB group excluding right BBB, a positive T wave in lead aVR and heart rate 70 bpm and higher were also potent predictors of incident HF similar to the QRS/T angles. In conclusion, both BBB and wide QRS/T angles are predictive of HF, and concomitant presence of both carries a much higher risk than for either predictor alone. These findings suggest that repolarization abnormalities in the setting of BBB should not be considered benign or an expected consequence of BBB.

Indexed as

ElectrocardiographyAtherosclerosisBundle-Branch BlockConfidence IntervalsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHeart FailureHumansIncidenceMalePredictive Value of TestsPrognosisProspective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID24929625
PMCPMC4098765
OpenAlexW2059778095

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.