Prevalence of abnormalities in electrocardiogram conduction in dialysis patients: a comparative study.
Journal
Jornal brasileiro de nefrologia
ISSN: 2175-8239
Titre abrégé: J Bras Nefrol
Pays: Brazil
ID NLM: 9426946
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
30
01
2020
accepted:
15
05
2020
pubmed:
28
7
2020
medline:
19
8
2021
entrez:
28
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The electrocardiogram (ECG) can aid in identification of chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients at high risk for cardiovascular diseases. Cohort studies describe ECG abnormalities in patients on hemodialysis (HD), but we did not find data comparing ECG abnormalities among patients with normal kidney function or peritoneal dialysis (PD) to those on hemodialysis. We hypothesized that ECG conduction abnormalities would be more common, and cardiac conduction interval times longer, among patients on hemodialysis vs. those on peritoneal dialysis and CKD 1 or 2. Retrospective review of adult inpatients' charts, comparing those with billing codes for "Hemodialysis" vs. inpatients without those charges, and an outpatient peritoneal dialysis cohort. Patients with CKD 3 or 4 were excluded. One hundred and sixty-seven charts were reviewed. ECG conduction intervals were consistently and statistically longer among hemodialysis patients (n=88) vs. peritoneal dialysis (n=22) and CKD stage 1 and 2 (n=57): PR (175±35 vs 160±44 vs 157±22 msec) (p=0.009), QRS (115±32 vs. 111±31 vs 91±18 msec) (p=0.001), QT (411±71 vs. 403±46 vs 374±55 msec) (p=0.006), QTc (487±49 vs. 464±38 vs 452±52 msec) (p=0.0001). The only significantly different conduction abnormality was prevalence of left bundle branch block: 13.6% among HD patients, 5% in PD, and 2% in CKD 1 and 2 (p=0.03). To our knowledge, this is the first study to report that ECG conduction intervals are significantly longer as one progresses from CKD Stage 1 and 2, to PD, to HD. These and other data support the need for future research to utilize ECG conduction times to identify dialysis patients who could potentially benefit from proactive cardiac evaluations and risk reduction.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The electrocardiogram (ECG) can aid in identification of chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients at high risk for cardiovascular diseases. Cohort studies describe ECG abnormalities in patients on hemodialysis (HD), but we did not find data comparing ECG abnormalities among patients with normal kidney function or peritoneal dialysis (PD) to those on hemodialysis. We hypothesized that ECG conduction abnormalities would be more common, and cardiac conduction interval times longer, among patients on hemodialysis vs. those on peritoneal dialysis and CKD 1 or 2.
METHODS
METHODS
Retrospective review of adult inpatients' charts, comparing those with billing codes for "Hemodialysis" vs. inpatients without those charges, and an outpatient peritoneal dialysis cohort. Patients with CKD 3 or 4 were excluded.
RESULTS
RESULTS
One hundred and sixty-seven charts were reviewed. ECG conduction intervals were consistently and statistically longer among hemodialysis patients (n=88) vs. peritoneal dialysis (n=22) and CKD stage 1 and 2 (n=57): PR (175±35 vs 160±44 vs 157±22 msec) (p=0.009), QRS (115±32 vs. 111±31 vs 91±18 msec) (p=0.001), QT (411±71 vs. 403±46 vs 374±55 msec) (p=0.006), QTc (487±49 vs. 464±38 vs 452±52 msec) (p=0.0001). The only significantly different conduction abnormality was prevalence of left bundle branch block: 13.6% among HD patients, 5% in PD, and 2% in CKD 1 and 2 (p=0.03).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
To our knowledge, this is the first study to report that ECG conduction intervals are significantly longer as one progresses from CKD Stage 1 and 2, to PD, to HD. These and other data support the need for future research to utilize ECG conduction times to identify dialysis patients who could potentially benefit from proactive cardiac evaluations and risk reduction.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32716472
pii: S0101-28002020005022202
doi: 10.1590/10.1590/2175-8239-JBN-2020-0018
pmc: PMC7860647
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
por
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
448-453Références
J Bras Nefrol. 2019 Jan-Mar;41(1):38-47
pubmed: 30118535
Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars. 2018 Jun;46(4):276-282
pubmed: 29853695
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Mar 17;53(11):976-81
pubmed: 19281930
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2007 May;2(3):501-8
pubmed: 17699457
Clin Kidney J. 2013 Apr;6(2):137-43
pubmed: 26019841
Clin Cardiol. 2010 Jun;33(6):361-6
pubmed: 20556806
Nephron Clin Pract. 2014;128(1-2):1-10
pubmed: 25402964
Semin Dial. 2008 Jul-Aug;21(4):300-7
pubmed: 18627568
Rom J Intern Med. 2006;44(4):407-17
pubmed: 18386617
Circulation. 2017 Aug 8;136(6):e137-e161
pubmed: 28455343
PLoS One. 2016 May 12;11(5):e0155445
pubmed: 27171393
Int Urol Nephrol. 2017 Mar;49(3):509-515
pubmed: 27943168
J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2017 Jan-Mar;29(1):61-64
pubmed: 28712176
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012 Oct;23(10):1725-34
pubmed: 22935481
Kardiol Pol. 2011;69(12):1242-7
pubmed: 22219098
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012 Jun;7(6):949-56
pubmed: 22461533
Arq Bras Cardiol. 2010 Apr;94(4):457-62
pubmed: 20339814
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2016 Dec;31(12):2115-2122
pubmed: 27540047
BMC Nephrol. 2013 Dec 23;14:280
pubmed: 24359445
J Bras Nefrol. 2012 Jul-Sep;34(3):235-42
pubmed: 23099828