Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28012118›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2017

Risk factors for QTc-prolongation: systematic review of the evidence.

Eline Vandael, Bert Vandenberk, Joris Vandenberghe, Rik Willems, Veerle Foulon

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 98 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
98citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

98 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Assessing arrhythmic risk in chronic kidney disease: A study of the index of cardiac-electrophysiological balance.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2025
    Article

38 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Eline VandaelDepartment of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Herestraat 49, O&N2, Box 521, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. Eline.Vandael@kuleuven.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7003-7448
Bert VandenberkDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Joris VandenbergheDepartment of Neurosciences, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Rik WillemsDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Veerle FoulonDepartment of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Herestraat 49, O&N2, Box 521, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background QTc-interval prolongation has been associated with serious adverse events, such as Torsade de Pointes and sudden cardiac death. In the prevention of QTc-prolongation, special attention should go to high-risk patients. Aim of the review The aim of this review is to summarize and assess the evidence for different risk factors for QTc-prolongation (demographic factors, comorbidities, electrolytes, QTc-prolonging medication). Methods Potential studies were retrieved based on a systematic search of articles published until June 2015 in the databases Medline and Embase. Both terms about QTc-prolongation/Torsade de Pointes and risk factors were added in the search strategy. The following inclusion criteria were applied: randomized controlled trials and observational studies; inclusion of ≥500 patients from a general population (not limited to specific disease states); assessment of association between QTc-interval and risk factors. For the articles that met the inclusion criteria, the following data were extracted: study design, setting and study population, number of patients and cases of QTc-prolongation, method of electrocardiogram-monitoring, QTc-correction formula, definition of QTc-prolongation, statistical methods and results. Quality assessment was performed using the GRADE approach (for randomized controlled trials) and the STROBE-recommendations (for observational studies). Based on the number of significant results and the level of significance, a quotation of the evidence was allocated. Results Ten observational studies could be included, with a total of 89,532 patients [prospective cohort design: N = 6; multiple regression analyses: N = 5; median STROBE score = 17/22 (range 15-18)]. Very strong evidence was found for hypokalemia, use of diuretics, antiarrhythmic drugs and QTc-prolonging drugs of list 1 of CredibleMeds. Little or no evidence was found for hyperlipidemia, the use of digoxin or statins, neurological disorders, diabetes, renal failure, depression, alcohol abuse, heart rate, pulmonary disorders, hormone replacement therapy, hypomagnesemia, history of a prolonged QTc-interval/Torsade de Pointes, familial history of cardiovascular disease, and the use of only QTc-prolonging drugs of list 2 or 3 of CredibleMeds. Conclusion This systematic review gives a clear overview of the available evidence for a broad range of risk factors for QTc-prolongation.

Indexed as

Age FactorsAnti-Arrhythmia AgentsBrugada SyndromeCardiac Conduction System DiseaseDiureticsElectrocardiographyHumansLong QT SyndromeProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk FactorsSmokingAnti-Arrhythmia AgentsDiureticsQTc-prolongationRisk factorsSudden cardiac deathSystematic reviewTorsade de Pointes

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.