Can prolonged P-R interval predict clinical outcomes in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome patients?

Mohammad Zareei1, Hossein Zareiamand2, Mahsa Kamali3

  • 1Faculty of Medicine, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran.

PubMed

Insights

Prolonged P-R interval did not significantly predict clinical outcomes like stroke or death in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome patients over six months. Further long-term studies are needed for definitive conclusions on this cardiac marker.

Area of Science:

  • Cardiology
  • Clinical Medicine
  • Diagnostic Markers

Background:

  • Assessing predictive value of electrocardiographic findings in acute coronary syndromes is crucial for patient management.
  • The P-R interval, reflecting atrioventricular conduction, may offer prognostic information in cardiac conditions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To determine if a prolonged P-R interval can predict clinical outcomes in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS).

Main Methods:

  • A descriptive-analytical study included 248 NSTEACS patients, divided into prolonged and normal P-R interval groups.
  • Exclusion criteria included specific cardiac conditions and medications; data collected via questionnaire and follow-up.
  • Six-month follow-up assessed outcomes such as ischemic stroke, coronary artery disease (CAD), and cardiovascular death.

Main Results:

  • Patients with prolonged P-R intervals showed higher frequencies of ischemic stroke, CAD, and cardiovascular death, though these differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.05).
  • Multivariate logistic regression found no significant relationship between prolonged P-R interval and adverse outcomes or specific angiographic findings.
  • Significant differences were observed between groups in history of myocardial infarction, HDL levels, heart rate, and specific ECG/angiographic findings.

Conclusions:

  • A prolonged P-R interval did not significantly predict adverse clinical outcomes within a six-month follow-up period in NSTEACS patients.
  • The study suggests that while baseline differences exist, the P-R interval's predictive power for short-term outcomes in this cohort is limited.
  • Further research with longer follow-up periods is recommended to fully elucidate the prognostic implications of a prolonged P-R interval in NSTEACS.
Abstract