4.1 Article Proceedings Paper

Alterations in QT Interval in Patients Undergoing Living Donor Liver Transplantation

期刊

TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS
卷 43, 期 1, 页码 170-173

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2010.12.002

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. QT interval prolongation, predisposing to ventricular tachyarrhythmia, has frequently been observed in patients with liver cirrhosis. During liver transplantation (LT) surgery, electrolyte imbalance and hemodynamic instability may affect QT interval changes. We evaluated the alterations in QT parameters at each stage of LT surgery. Methods. We assessed 50 living donor LT recipients without overt heart disease for the corrected QT (QTc) and the interval from peak to the end of the T wave (Tp-e) automatically using Bazett's formula with LabChart software. QT parameters, laboratory and hemodynamic data were simultaneously collected in the following stages of LT: before anesthetic induction (baseline), pre-anhepatic, anhepatic, 1 hour postreperfusion, and after hepatic artery anastomosis. Recipients were allocated into 2 groups according to their baseline QTc: >= 440 versus <440 msec. Results. QTc progressively rose from the pre-anhepatic stage remaining prolonged in each stage of LT surgery compared with the baseline. In the anhepatic stage, 54% of recipients showed marked prolongation of QTc >= 500 msec (522 +/- 14), which indicated the potential for a fatal ventricular dysrhythmia: 77% and 36% in groups with QTc >= 440 and <440 msec, respectively. As opposed to changes in QTc, Tp-e in the anhepatic stage decreased significantly; however, it returned to the baseline level in the neohepatic stage. Conclusion. A prolonged QTc interval (>= 500 msec) was frequently observed throughout the procedure of LT, even among patients with baseline QTc <440 msec, emphasizing the importance of optimizing electrolyte balance and hemodynamic status to reduce greater risk of perioperative arrhythmias.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据