ArticleCureus2023
Evaluation of Index of Cardiac Electrophysiological Balance in Patients With Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMyotonic dystrophy type 1(MD1), which is characterized by decreased muscle tone, progressive muscle weakness, and cardiac involvement, is an autosomal dominant and progressive congenital muscle disease. Cardiac involvement more often manifests as conduction abnormalities and arrhythmias (such as supraventricular or ventricular). Approximately one-third of MD1-related deaths occur due to cardiac causes. The index of cardiac-electrophysiological balance (ICEB) is a current parameter calculated as QT interval/QRS duration. The increase in this parameter has been associated with malignant ventricular arrhythmias. In this study, our aim was to compare the ICEB values of MD1 patients and the normal population. MATERIAL AND
methodA total of 62 patients were included in our study. They were divided into two groups - 32 MD patients and 30 controls. The demographic, clinical, laboratory, and electrocardiographic parameters of the two groups were compared.
resultsThe median age of the study population was 24 (20-36 IQR), and 36 (58%) of these patients were female. Body mass index was higher in the control group (p = 0.037). While in the MD1 group creatinine kinase was significantly higher (p <0.001), In the control group creatinine, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, calcium, and lymphocyte levels were significantly higher (p=0.031, p= 0.003, p=0.001, p=0.002, p=0.031, respectively). ICEB [3.96 (3.65-4.46) vs 3.74 (3.49-3.85) p=0.015] and corrected ICEB (ICEBc) [4.48 (4.08-4.92) vs 4.20 (4.03-4.51) p = 0.048] were significantly higher in the MD1 group.
conclusionIn our study, ICEB was found to be higher in MD1 patients than in the control group. Increased ICEB and ICEBc values in MD1 patients may precipitate ventricular arrhythmias in the future. Close monitoring of these parameters can be helpful in predicting possible ventricular arrhythmias and in risk stratification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.