Suppr超能文献

QT 延长药物与尸检定义的猝死原因风险的关联。

Association of QT-Prolonging Medications With Risk of Autopsy-Defined Causes of Sudden Death.

机构信息

Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.

Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco.

出版信息

JAMA Intern Med. 2020 May 1;180(5):698-706. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.0148.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

QT-prolonging medications (QTPMs) are a reported risk factor for sudden cardiac death (SCD) when defined by consensus criteria that presume an arrhythmic cause. The effect of QTPM on autopsy-defined sudden arrhythmic death (SAD) is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between QTPM and autopsy-defined SAD vs nonarrhythmic cause of sudden death.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective countywide case-control study included World Health Organization-defined (presumed) SCD cases who underwent autopsy as part of the San Francisco Postmortem Systematic Investigation of Sudden Cardiac Death Study (POST SCD) to determine arrhythmic or nonarrhythmic cause, and control deaths due to trauma (hereinafter referred to as trauma controls) in San Francisco County, California, from February 1, 2011, to March 1, 2014. Multivariate regression was used to evaluate the association of QTPM with the risk of presumed SCD, autopsy-defined SAD, and non-SAD compared with trauma controls. Medication exposure, determined by prescription lists and postmortem toxicologic findings, was used to calculate a summative QTPM exposure score (range, 0-20). Data were analyzed from September 1, 2018, to June 15, 2019.

EXPOSURE

QT-prolonging medication exposure, as measured by QTPM score (1 indicated low; 2-4, moderate; and >4, high).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Death due to trauma, presumed SCD, and autopsy-defined non-SAD and SAD with no postmortem findings of extracardiac cause.

RESULTS

A total of 629 patients (mean [SD] age, 61.4 [15.7] years; 439 men [69.8%]) were included, 525 with presumed SCDs and 104 traumatic death controls. Individuals with presumed SCDs had higher exposure and were more likely to be taking any QTPM (291 [55.4%] vs 28 [26.9%]; P < .001) than trauma controls. Use of QTPMs was associated with increased risk of presumed SCD in low (odds ratio [OR], 2.25 [95% CI, 1.03-4.96]; P = .04) and high (OR, 6.70 [95% CI, 1.47-30.67]; P = .01) exposure groups. After autopsy adjudication, use of QTPMs was associated with increased risk of non-SAD (low-risk OR, 2.88 [95% CI, 1.18-6.99; P = .02]; moderate-risk OR, 2.62 [95% CI, 1.20-5.73; P = .02]; and high-risk OR, 14.22 [95% CI, 2.91-69.30; P = .001]) but not SAD in all exposure groups. This association was attenuated by the exclusion of occult overdose non-SADs in the highest exposure group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings confirm the association between QTPMs and presumed SCD; however, after autopsy, this risk was specific for nonarrhythmic causes of sudden death. Studies using consensus SCD criteria may overestimate the association of QTPMs with the risk of SAD.

摘要

重要性

当使用共识标准定义 QT 延长药物 (QTPM) 为导致心源性猝死 (SCD) 的危险因素时,这些药物被认为存在心律失常的原因。但是 QTPM 对尸检定义的心律失常性猝死 (SAD) 的影响尚不清楚。

目的

评估 QTPM 与尸检定义的 SAD 与非心律失常性猝死之间的关联。

设计、地点和参与者:这项前瞻性全县病例对照研究纳入了作为旧金山死后系统调查心源性猝死研究 (POST SCD) 的一部分进行尸检的世界卫生组织定义的 (假定) SCD 病例,以确定心律失常或非心律失常的原因,以及加利福尼亚州旧金山县因创伤而死亡的病例(以下简称创伤对照组)。从 2011 年 2 月 1 日至 2014 年 3 月 1 日。使用多元回归评估 QTPM 与假定 SCD、尸检定义的 SAD 和非 SAD 与创伤对照组的风险关联。通过处方清单和死后毒理学发现来确定药物暴露情况,并用 QTPM 暴露评分(范围 0-20)来计算总和。数据于 2018 年 9 月 1 日至 2019 年 6 月 15 日进行分析。

暴露

通过 QTPM 评分(1 表示低;2-4 表示中度;>4 表示高)来衡量 QTPM 暴露情况。

主要结局和测量

因创伤、假定 SCD 以及无尸检发现的非心律失常性猝死和 SAD 而导致的死亡。

结果

共纳入 629 名患者(平均[标准差]年龄为 61.4[15.7]岁;439 名男性[69.8%]),525 名患有假定 SCD 和 104 名创伤性死亡对照组。与创伤对照组相比,假定 SCD 患者的暴露程度更高,更有可能服用任何 QTPM(291[55.4%]与 28[26.9%];P<0.001)。使用 QTPM 与假定 SCD 的低(比值比 [OR],2.25[95%置信区间,1.03-4.96];P=0.04)和高(OR,6.70[95%置信区间,1.47-30.67];P=0.01)暴露组的风险增加相关。在尸检裁决后,使用 QTPM 与非心律失常性猝死的风险增加相关(低风险 OR,2.88[95%置信区间,1.18-6.99;P=0.02];中风险 OR,2.62[95%置信区间,1.20-5.73;P=0.02];高风险 OR,14.22[95%置信区间,2.91-69.30;P=0.001]),但在所有暴露组中均未与 SAD 相关。排除最高暴露组中隐匿性过量非心律失常性猝死病例后,这种关联减弱。

结论和相关性

这些发现证实了 QTPM 与假定 SCD 之间的关联;然而,尸检后,这种风险是与非心律失常性猝死的特定原因相关的。使用共识 SCD 标准的研究可能高估了 QTPM 与 SAD 风险的关联。

相似文献

5
Sertindole for schizophrenia.用于治疗精神分裂症的舍吲哚。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Jul 20;2005(3):CD001715. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001715.pub2.
8
Systemic treatments for metastatic cutaneous melanoma.转移性皮肤黑色素瘤的全身治疗
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 6;2(2):CD011123. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011123.pub2.

引用本文的文献

3
Exercises in Clinical Reasoning: Beyond the Surface.临床推理练习:透过表象深入探究
J Gen Intern Med. 2023 Nov;38(14):3257-3261. doi: 10.1007/s11606-023-08365-3. Epub 2023 Aug 17.
5
Emergency Management of Electrical Storm: A Practical Overview.电风暴的应急处理:实用概述。
Medicina (Kaunas). 2023 Feb 19;59(2):405. doi: 10.3390/medicina59020405.
7
Drug-induced Sudden Death: A Scoping Review.药物性猝死:范围综述。
Curr Drug Saf. 2023;18(3):307-317. doi: 10.2174/1574886317666220525115232.

本文引用的文献

1
Sudden Arrhythmic Death: What Is the Gold Standard?心源性猝死:金标准是什么?
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2019 Jul;12(7):e007474. doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.119.007474. Epub 2019 Jun 28.
3
Sudden Cardiac Deaths-WHO Says They Are Always Arrhythmic?
JAMA Cardiol. 2018 Jul 1;3(7):556-558. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2018.1008.
9
Sudden neurologic death masquerading as out-of-hospital sudden cardiac death.伪装成院外心脏性猝死的突发性神经系统死亡
Neurology. 2016 Oct 18;87(16):1669-1673. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000003238. Epub 2016 Sep 16.
10
Sudden Death in Patients With Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices.心脏植入式电子设备患者的猝死。
JAMA Intern Med. 2015 Aug;175(8):1342-50. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.2641.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验