Sex and Rate Change Differences in QT/RR Hysteresis in Healthy Subjects

While it is now well-understood that the extent of QT interval changes due to underlying heart rate differences (i.e., the QT/RR adaptation) needs to be distinguished from the speed with which the QT interval reacts to heart rate changes (i.e., the so-called QT/RR hysteresis), gaps still exist in the physiologic understanding of QT/RR hysteresis processes. This study was designed to address the questions of whether the speed of QT adaptation to heart rate changes is driven by time or by number of cardiac cycles; whether QT interval adaptation speed is the same when heart rate accelerates and decelerates; and whether the characteristics of QT/RR hysteresis are related to age and sex. The study evaluated 897,570 measurements of QT intervals together with their 5-min histories of preceding RR intervals, all recorded in 751 healthy volunteers (336 females) aged 34.3 ± 9.5 years. Three different QT/RR adaptation models were combined with exponential decay models that distinguished time-based and interval-based QT/RR hysteresis. In each subject and for each modelling combination, a best-fit combination of modelling parameters was obtained by seeking minimal regression residuals. The results showed that the response of QT/RR hysteresis appears to be driven by absolute time rather than by the number of cardiac cycles. The speed of QT/RR hysteresis was found decreasing with increasing age whilst the duration of individually rate corrected QTc interval was found increasing with increasing age. Contrary to the longer QTc intervals, QT/RR hysteresis speed was faster in females. QT/RR hysteresis differences between heart rate acceleration and deceleration were not found to be physiologically systematic (i.e., they differed among different healthy subjects), but on average, QT/RR hysteresis speed was found slower after heart rate acceleration than after rate deceleration.

Sources of QTc variability: Implications for effective ECG monitoring in clinical practice

Pharmaceuticals that prolong ventricular repolarization may be proarrhythmic in susceptible patients. While this fact is well recognized, schemes for sequential QTc interval monitoring in patients receiving QT‐prolonging drugs are frequently overlooked or, if implemented, underutilized in clinical practice. There are several reasons for this gap in day‐to‐day clinical practice. One of these is the perception that serially measured QTc intervals are subject to substantial variability that hampers the distinction between potential proarrhythmic signs and other sources of QTc variability. This review shows that substantial part of the QTc variability can be avoided if more accurate methodology for electrocardiogram collection, measurement, and interpretation is used. Four aspects of such a methodology are discussed. First, advanced methods for QT interval measurement are proposed including suggestion of multilead measurements in problematic recordings such as those in atrial fibrillation patients. Second, serial comparisons of T‐wave morphologies are advocated instead of simple acceptance of historical QTc measurements. Third, the necessity of understanding the pitfalls of heart rate correction is stressed including the necessity of avoiding the Bazett correction in cases of using QTc values for clinical decisions. Finally, the frequently overlooked problem of QT‐heart rate hysteresis is discussed including the possibility of gross QTc errors when correcting the QT interval for simultaneously measured short‐term heart rate.

Individually Rate Corrected QTc Intervals in Children and Adolescents

Accurate evaluation of the appearance of QTc sex differences during childhood and adolescence is intricate. Inter-subject differences of individual QT/RR patterns make generic heart rate corrections inaccurate because of fast resting heart rates in children. The study investigated 527 healthy children and adolescents aged 4–19 years (268 females, 50.9%). All underwent continuous ECG 12-lead monitoring while performing postural changes during a 70-min investigative protocol to obtain QT interval measurements at different heart rates. On average, more than 1200 ECG measurements (QT interval and its 5-min history of preceding RR intervals) were made in each subject. Curvilinear QT/RR regression involving intra-individual correction for QT/RR hysteresis were calculated in each subject. The projection of the QT/RR regressions to the heart rate of 60 beats per minute defined individually corrected QTc intervals. In males, gradual QTc shortening by about 15 ms appeared during the ages of 13–19 years synchronously with the incidence of secondary sex signs (p = 0.016). On the contrary, whilst gradual QTc prolongation by about 10 ms appeared in females, it occurred only during ages 16–19 years and was not related to the incidence of secondary sex signs (p = 0.18). The study also showed that in children and adolescents, linear QT/RR models fit the intra-subject data significantly more closely than the log-linear models (p < 0.001). The study speculates that hormonal shifts during puberty might be directly responsible for the QTc shortening in males but that QTc prolongation in females is likely more complex since it was noted to follow the appearance of secondary sex signs only after a considerable delay.

Importance of QT/RR hysteresis correction in studies of drug-induced QTc interval changes

QT/RR hysteresis and QT/RR adaptation are interlinked but separate physiological processes signifying how quickly and how much QT interval changes when heart rate changes, respectively. While QT interval duration is, as a rule, corrected for heart rate in terms of the QT/RR adaptation, the correction for QT/RR hysteresis is frequently omitted in studies of drug-induced QTc changes. This study used data from previously conducted thorough QT studies to investigate the extent of QTc errors caused by omitting the correction for QT/RR hysteresis, particularly in small clinical investigations. Statistical modeling approach was used to generate 11,000 simulated samples of 10-subject studies in which mixed effect PK/PD models were used to estimate drug-induced QTc changes at mean maximum plasma concentration of investigated compounds. Calculations of QTc intervals involving and omitting QT/RR hysteresis correction were compared. These comparisons showed that ignoring QT/RR hysteresis has two undesirable effects: (A) In the design of subject-specific heart rate corrections (needed in studies of drugs that change heart rate) omission of QT/RR hysteresis may lead to signals of QTc prolongation of more than 10 ms to be missed. (B) Irrespective of whether the investigated drug changes heart rate, omission of QT/RR hysteresis causes the widths of the confidence intervals of the PK/PD predicted QTc interval changes to be increased by 20–30% on average (exceeding 50% in some cases). This may lead to a failure of excluding meaningful QTc prolongation which would be excluded if using hysteresis correction. The study concludes that correction for QT/RR hysteresis should be incorporated into future studies of drug-induced QTc changes. Subject-specific heart rate corrections that omit hysteresis correction may lead to erroneously biased conclusions. Even when using universal (e.g. Fridericia) heart rate correction, hysteresis correction decreases the confidence intervals of QTc changes and thus helps avoiding false positive outcomes.