Abstract
Background: One of the greatest challenges in the diagnosis of acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is the lack of specific laboratory tests that support multidetector computed tomography (CT). Our aim is to investigate the diagnostic value of electrocardiographic QT parameters in AMI and their relationship with CT findings.
Materials and Methods: Patients who were admitted to the emergency department with abdominal pain were recruited retrospectively from the hospital information system. Grouping was carried out on the basis of AMI (n=78) and non-AMI (n=78). In both groups, the corrected QT (QTc) and QT dispersion (QTD) were measured on electrocardiographs, and the qualitative and quantitative CT findings were evaluated on CT examinations.
Results: The QTc and QTD values were higher in the AMI group. The median QTc values were 456.16 (IQR: 422.88-483.16) for the AMI group and 388.83 (IQR: 359.74-415.83) for the control group (p<0.001), and the median QTD values were 58 (IQR: 50.3-68.25) for the AMI group and 46 (IQR: 42-50) for the control group (p<0.001).
In the CT analysis, the QTc values were significantly higher among AMI patients, with images of paper-thin bowel walls and the absence of bowel wall enhancement (p=0.042 and p=0.042, respectively). Meanwhile, the QTD values were significantly higher among patients with venous pneumatosis findings on CT (p=0.005). In the regression analysis, a significant relationship was found between the QT parameters and AMI (p<0.001). For QTc, an AUC of 0.903 (95% CI: 0.857-0.950, p<0.001), a sensitivity of 80.8%, and a specificity of 82.3% were found. For QTD, an AUC of 0.821 (95% CI: 0.753-0.889, p<0.001), a sensitivity of 73.1%, and a specificity of 82.3% were found.
Conclusion: We found the QTc and QTD values to be significantly higher among AMI patients. Furthermore, we found a significant relationship between the CT findings and QTc and QTD and a significant relationship between survival and QTc in the AMI group.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000014446]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4291/wjgp.v7.i1.125]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1503884]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13017-017-0150-5]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13304-020-00857-9]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ccc.2015.11.001]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11239-011-0660-z]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2009.12.002]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.09.006]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(95)90697-5]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(94)91164-9]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/hrt.63.6.342]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.910107]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/ajkd.2002.32005]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2018.12.003]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0002-9149(94)90462-6]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2007.03.013]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(00)00962-1]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cvr/26.8.740]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2017-0291]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13244-018-0641-2]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00018-021-03812-y]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5152/tjg.2014.4960]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0b013e31823b4465]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.2018170163]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.19.22625]