Diagnosis of Rejection by Analyzing Ventricular Late Potentials in Heart Transplant Patients

Heart transplant rejection originates slow and fragmented conduction. Signal-averaged ECG (SAECG) is a stratification method in the risk of rejection. To develop a risk score for rejection, using SAECG variables. We studied 28 transplant patients. First, we divided the sample into two groups based o...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia 2016-02, Vol.106 (2), p.136-144
Hauptverfasser: Mendes, Vítor Nogueira, Pereira, Telmo Santos, Matos, Vítor Azevedo
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Heart transplant rejection originates slow and fragmented conduction. Signal-averaged ECG (SAECG) is a stratification method in the risk of rejection. To develop a risk score for rejection, using SAECG variables. We studied 28 transplant patients. First, we divided the sample into two groups based on the occurrence of acute rejection (5 with rejection and 23 without). In a second phase, we divided the sample considering the existence or not of rejection in at least one biopsy performed on the follow-up period (rejection pm1: 18 with rejection and 10 without). On conventional ECG, the presence of fibrosis was the only criterion associated with acute rejection (OR = 19; 95% CI = 1.65-218.47; p = 0.02). Considering the rejection pm1, an association was found with the SAECG variables, mainly with RMS40 (OR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.87-0.99; p = 0.03) and LAS40 (OR = 1.06; 95% IC = 1.01-1.11; p = 0.03). We formulated a risk score including those variables, and evaluated its discriminative performance in our sample. The presence of fibrosis with increasing of LAS40 and decreasing of RMS40 showed a good ability to distinguish between patients with and without rejection (AUC = 0.82; p < 0.01), assuming a cutoff point of sensitivity = 83.3% and specificity = 60%. The SAECG distinguished between patients with and without rejection. The usefulness of the proposed risk score must be demonstrated in larger follow-up studies.
ISSN:0066-782X
1678-4170
1678-4170
DOI:10.5935/abc.20160011