Predictive Value of Electrocardiographic Markers Versus Echocardiographic and Clinical Measures for Appropriate ICD Shocks in Heart Failure Patients

<b>Background:</b> Despite the survival benefit of ICDs in patients with HFrEF, most recipients do not receive appropriate therapy during follow-up. Existing risk models based on echocardiographic and clinical parameters show limited predictive accuracy for arrhythmic events. This study aimed to assess whether ECG-derived markers outperform conventional measures in predicting appropriate ICD shocks. <b>Methods:</b> This retrospective observational study included 375 patients with HFrEF who underwent ICD implantation for primary prevention at least six months before study enrollment. Twelve-lead surface ECGs were analyzed for a QTc interval, Tp-e/QT ratio, frontal QRS-T angle, and maximum deflection index (MDI). Clinical, echocardiographic, and arrhythmic event data obtained from device interrogations were evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and multivariate logistic regression were performed to identify independent predictors of appropriate ICD shocks. <b>Results:</b> Patients who experienced appropriate ICD shocks had significantly higher rates of a complete bundle branch block, digoxin use, QRS duration, QTc, Tp-e/QT ratio, frontal QRS-T angle, MDI, and right-ventricular pacing ratio. Conversely, beta-blocker use was significantly lower in this group. In multivariate analysis, independent predictors of appropriate shocks included the patient's digoxin use (OR = 2.931, <i>p</i> = 0.003), beta-blocker use (OR = 0.275, <i>p</i> = 0.002), frontal QRS-T angle (OR = 1.009, <i>p</i> < 0.001), QTc interval (OR = 1.020, <i>p</i> < 0.001), and Tp-e/QT ratio (OR = 4.882, <i>p</i> = 0.050). The frontal QRS-T angle had a cutoff value of 105.5° for predicting appropriate ICD shocks (sensitivity: 73.6%, specificity: 85.2%, AUC = 0.758, <i>p</i> < 0.001). <b>Conclusions:</b> Electrocardiographic markers, particularly the frontal QRS-T angle, QTc interval, and Tp-e/QT ratio, demonstrated superior predictive power for appropriate ICD shocks compared to conventional echocardiographic and clinical measures. These easily obtainable, non-invasive ECG parameters may improve current risk stratification models and support more individualized ICD implantation strategies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2025-08-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14155506
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.78
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Predictive Value of Electrocardiographic Markers Versus Echocardiographic and Clinical Measures for Appropriate ICD Shocks in Heart Failure Patients

Özkan Bekler, Saim Kazan, Onur Kaypaklı, Hazar Harbalıoğlu
2 citations
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
2.78
article

Predictive Value of Electrocardiographic Markers Versus Echocardiographic and Clinical Measures for Appropriate ICD Shocks in Heart Failure Patients

Özkan Bekler, Saim Kazan, Onur Kaypaklı, Hazar Harbalıoğlu
article en
2 citations

Abstract

<b>Background:</b> Despite the survival benefit of ICDs in patients with HFrEF, most recipients do not receive appropriate therapy during follow-up. Existing risk models based on echocardiographic and clinical parameters show limited predictive accuracy for arrhythmic events. This study aimed to assess whether ECG-derived markers outperform conventional measures in predicting appropriate ICD shocks. <b>Methods:</b> This retrospective observational study included 375 patients with HFrEF who underwent ICD implantation for primary prevention at least six months before study enrollment. Twelve-lead surface ECGs were analyzed for a QTc interval, Tp-e/QT ratio, frontal QRS-T angle, and maximum deflection index (MDI). Clinical, echocardiographic, and arrhythmic event data obtained from device interrogations were evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and multivariate logistic regression were performed to identify independent predictors of appropriate ICD shocks. <b>Results:</b> Patients who experienced appropriate ICD shocks had significantly higher rates of a complete bundle branch block, digoxin use, QRS duration, QTc, Tp-e/QT ratio, frontal QRS-T angle, MDI, and right-ventricular pacing ratio. Conversely, beta-blocker use was significantly lower in this group. In multivariate analysis, independent predictors of appropriate shocks included the patient's digoxin use (OR = 2.931, <i>p</i> = 0.003), beta-blocker use (OR = 0.275, <i>p</i> = 0.002), frontal QRS-T angle (OR = 1.009, <i>p</i> < 0.001), QTc interval (OR = 1.020, <i>p</i> < 0.001), and Tp-e/QT ratio (OR = 4.882, <i>p</i> = 0.050). The frontal QRS-T angle had a cutoff value of 105.5° for predicting appropriate ICD shocks (sensitivity: 73.6%, specificity: 85.2%, AUC = 0.758, <i>p</i> < 0.001). <b>Conclusions:</b> Electrocardiographic markers, particularly the frontal QRS-T angle, QTc interval, and Tp-e/QT ratio, demonstrated superior predictive power for appropriate ICD shocks compared to conventional echocardiographic and clinical measures. These easily obtainable, non-invasive ECG parameters may improve current risk stratification models and support more individualized ICD implantation strategies.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 14(15)
Istanbul Medipol University (TR), Mustafa Kemal University (TR)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
2.78
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.