4.0 Article

QT Interval Prolongation and QRS Voltage Reduction in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis

Journal

ADVANCES IN CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE
Volume 24, Issue 4, Pages 615-622

Publisher

WROCLAW MEDICAL UNIV
DOI: 10.17219/acem/28681

Keywords

ascites; liver cirrhosis; electrocardiography; QT interval; QRS voltage

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Liver cirrhosis is associated with functional abnormalities of the cardiovascular system with coexisting electrocardiographic (ECG) abnormalities. Objectives. The aim was to analyze ECG changes in patients with cirrhosis, to evaluate whether alcoholic etiology of cirrhosis and ascites has an impact on ECG changes. Material and Methods. The study involved 81 patients with previously untreated alcoholic cirrhosis (64 patients with ascites, classes B and C according to the Child-Pugh classification; and 17 without ascites, categorized as class A); 41 patients with previously untreated cirrhosis due to chronic hepatitis C (HCV - 30 patients with ascites, classes B and C; and 11 without ascites, class A); 42 with alcoholic steatohepatitis and 46 with alcoholic steatosis. The control group consisted of 32 healthy volunteers. Twelve-lead ECG recordings were performed and selected parameters were measured. Results. Significantly longer QT and QTc intervals and lower QRS voltage were found in patients with alcoholic and HCV cirrhosis compared to the controls. Significantly lower QRS voltage was found in subjects with ascites than in those without ascites. Removal of ascites significantly increased QRS voltage. Conclusions. In cirrhosis, irrespective of etiology, ECG changes involved prolonged QT and QTc intervals and reduced QRS voltage. Prolonged QT and QTc intervals were not related to the severity of cirrhosis or to the presence of ascites. However, low QRS voltage was associated with the presence of ascites. Removal of ascites reverses low QRS voltage.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available