2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2018.04.017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Electrocardiographic left atrial abnormalities predict cardiovascular mortality

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
8
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
8
1
Order By: Relevance
“…13 Subjects with a P-wave duration >120 ms had a 21% greater risk of CV death compared to subjects with a P-wave duration ≤120 ms 13 Moreover, in a long-term study at the same center, in which subjects with a mean age of 43 years were followed for a median duration of 17 years, prolonged P-wave duration was associated with 1.53-3.08 fold in CV death. 11 The reason for the difference in hazard ratios between these previous studies and our present study might be that our present study population consisted of Japanese with CV risks, who were older than the subjects in the previous studies. Generally, P-wave duration is associated with age 19 and prolonged with aging.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 63%
“…13 Subjects with a P-wave duration >120 ms had a 21% greater risk of CV death compared to subjects with a P-wave duration ≤120 ms 13 Moreover, in a long-term study at the same center, in which subjects with a mean age of 43 years were followed for a median duration of 17 years, prolonged P-wave duration was associated with 1.53-3.08 fold in CV death. 11 The reason for the difference in hazard ratios between these previous studies and our present study might be that our present study population consisted of Japanese with CV risks, who were older than the subjects in the previous studies. Generally, P-wave duration is associated with age 19 and prolonged with aging.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 63%
“…Our models demonstrated better predictive capability for all-cause death (the mean c-statistics of 10 models was 0.881 ± 0.027 for the training dataset and 0.927 ± 0.101 for the testing dataset) and CV death (0.862 ± 0.029 for the training model and 0.897 ± 0.069 for the testing model) than previous studies that used a few ECG parameters, in which the c-statistics for predicting death were 0.58 (maximal P wave duration) [22], 0.64 (minimal P′ amplitude in lead V1 and V2) [22], 0.61 (QRS area) [23], 0.55 (QRS morphology) [23], 0.51 (QRS duration) [23], 0.727 (QRS-T angle), [24] and 0.759 (model including clinical variables, such as age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, and ECG parameters) [6]. Not surprisingly, the high predictive capabilities of our models are due to the use of a large number of ECG parameters as consecutive values and the application of machine learning, which may sacrifice simplicity but prioritize the predictive capability [11].…”
Section: Comparison With Previous Studies and Clinical Implications Omentioning
confidence: 57%
“…Third was the Stanford clinical study 10 that included 20 827 veterans younger than 56 years of age who underwent ECGs at a Veteran's Affairs Medical Center from 1987 to 1999, followed for a median duration of 17.8 years for CVD. Cox Hazard analyses were applied, with adjustment for age, sex, and ECG abnormalities.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…8,9 In recent work, we found in a clinical population of 20 827 young veterans (mean age 44) followed for a median duration of 17.8 years an association between ECG-LAA and cardiovascular death (CVD) after age adjustment [hazard ratio (HR): 2.9-4.1]. 10 In this work, we (1) describe P wave patterns and measurements in a large population of individuals being screened for competitive sports participation and (2) compare the IEC for LAE in young competitive athletes to the Stanford criteria for ECG-LAA. Our retrospective findings are hypothesis generating and require validation in a large prospective athlete follow-up study.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation