Clinical impact of repolarization changes in supine versus upright body position
Abstract
Background: The impact of postural changes on various electrocardiography (ECG) characteristics has only been assessed in a few small studies. This large prospective trial was conducted to confirm or refute preliminary data and add important results with immediate impact on daily clinical practice.
Methods: ECGs in supine and upright position from 1028 patients were analyzed. Evaluation was made according to changes in T-wave vector and direction, ST-segment deviation, heart rate, QT interval and QTc interval was performed. Findings were correlated with the medical history of patients.
Results: Positional change from supine to upright resulted in a significantly increased heart rate (8.05 ± 7.71 bpm) and a significantly increased QTc interval after Bazetts (18 ± 23.45 ms) and Fridericas (8.84 ± 17.30) formula. In the upright position significantly more T-waves turned negative (14.7%) than positive (5.7%). ST elevation was recorded in only 0.4% and ST depression in not more than 0.2% of all patients.
Conclusions: The majority of the patients do not show significant morphological changes in their ECG by changing the body position from supine to upright. Changes of QTc time instead, are significant and the interval might be overestimated in upright. Therefore assessment of the QTc interval should strictly be done in a supine position.
Keywords: electrocardiographyelectrophysiologyfrom supine to uprightQTc variationslong-QT
References
- Madias JE. Comparability of the standing and supine standard electrocardiograms and standing sitting and supine stress electrocardiograms. J Electrocardiol. 2006; 39(2): 142–149.
- Williams GC, Dunnington KM, Hu MY, et al. The impact of posture on cardiac repolarization: more than heart rate? J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2006; 17(4): 352–358.
- Swenson DJ, Geneser SE, Stinstra JG, et al. Cardiac position sensitivity study in the electrocardiographic forward problem using stochastic collocation and boundary element methods. Ann Biomed Eng. 2011; 39(12): 2900–2910.
- Adams M, Drew B. Body position effects on the ECG. J Electrocardiol. 1997; 30(4): 285–291.
- Huang MH, Ebey J, Wolf S. Heart rate-Qt interval relationship during postural change and exercise. A possible connection to cardiac contractility. Integr Physiol Behav Sci. 1991; 26(1): 5–17.
- Drezner J, Ackerman M, Anderson J, et al. Electrocardiographic interpretation in athletes: the ‘Seattle Criteria’: Table 1. Br J Sports Med. 2013; 47(3): 122–124.
- Christov II, Simova II. fully automated method for QT interval measurement in ECG. Computers in Cardiology. 2006; 33: 321–324.
- Bazett HC. An analysis of the time-relations of electrocardiograms. Heart. 1920; 7: 353–370.
- Fridericia LS. The duration of systole in an electrocardiogram in normal humans and in patients with heart disease. 1920. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2003; 8(4): 343–351.
- Obata Y, Ruzankin P, Ong QiJ, et al. The impact of posture on the cardiac depolarization and repolarization phases of the QT interval in healthy subjects. J Electrocardiol. 2017; 50(5): 640–645.
- Sagie A, Larson MG, Goldberg RJ, et al. An improved method for adjusting the QT interval for heart rate (the Framingham Heart Study). Am J Cardiol. 1992; 70(7): 797–801.
- Vandenberk B, Vandael E, Robyns T, et al. Which QT correction formulae to use for QT monitoring? J Am Heart Assoc. 2016; 5(6).
- Davey P. Influence of posture and handgrip on the QT interval in left ventricular hypertrophy and in chronic heart failure. Clin Sci (Lond). 1999; 96(4): 403–407.
- Macfarlane PW, Antzelevitch C, Haissaguerre M, et al. The Early Repolarization Pattern: A Consensus Paper. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 66(4): 470–477.
