Application of the Symptoms-Varices-Pathophysiology classification system in patients with pelvic venous disorders.

Introduction: In 2021, the American Vein and Lymphatic Society convened a multi-disciplinary group to develop a valid and reliable discriminative instrument for the classification of patients suffering from pelvic venous disorders (PeVD) referred to as the Symptoms-Varices-Pathophysiology (SVP) system. Limited data exists regarding the utility of this instrument in the care of patients with PeVD. The goal of this investigation is to apply the SVP classification system to a group of patients treated for PeVDs. Methods: From January 2018 to January 2019, we retrospectively reviewed the records of 70 female patients treated for a PeVD at the Center for Vascular Medicine. Age, race, gender, medical/surgical histories, CEAP classification and intervention types were assessed and patients were categorized according to their SVP classification. The prevalence of each S and V class, their association with gonadal or iliac vein obstructive lesions and the prevalence of lower extremity varicosities was evaluated. Results: The average age of the entire cohort was 47.4 ± 13.4. The race distribution was as follows: African American (6), Hispanic (1), and Caucasian (63). Of the 140 limbs, 57% were C3 or greater with an average rVCSS score of 4.53. At the time of intervention, 54 patients (77%) demonstrated CEAP class 2 disease or greater with 25 patients (35%) demonstrating lower extremity varicosities. Medical co-morbidities included the following: Endometriosis (n = 1), Uterine Fibroids (n = 1), Ovarian cysts (n = 4), history of venous thrombosis (n = 2) and prior lower extremity venous procedures (n = 3). Overall, 47 patients (67.1%) demonstrated S2 disease secondary to dyspareunia, post-coital pain, or dysmenorrhea. S2 alone was observed in 17 patients (24.3%), S2,3a and S2,3a,3b in nine patients each (12.9%), and S2,3b was in 12 patients (17.1%). Thirteen patients presented with isolated extra-pelvic symptoms (19%); four (5.7%) were classified as S3a,3b, and nine (12.9%) were classified as S3b only. Finally, 10 patients (14%) had no pelvic symptoms and thus were classified as S0. V0 disease was observed in 17 patients (24.3%) secondary to a high incidence of iliac vein stenoses (IVS). V1 disease was observed in 1 patient (1.43%). V2 disease was observed in 53 patients (74.3%) secondary to iliac or ovarian vein reflux. Of these, 45 patients (64.3%) presented with reflux in the iliac veins. Sixteen patients had reflux in the common iliac veins, 17 patients exhibited reflux of the external iliac veins, and 41 patients demonstrated reflux of the internal iliac veins. Thirty-two patients (45.7%) presented with V2 disease secondary to reflux of the ovarian veins, 8 of whom presented with isolated ovarian vein reflux without IVS. Bilateral ovarian vein reflux was observed in 6 patients (9%) and unilaterally in 26 (37%) patients with concomitant ovarian vein reflux and IVS observed in 31 patients (44%). In patients with ovarian vein reflux, 89% had a concomitant iliac vein stenosis: (96.9% in the common iliac vein, 81.3% in the external iliac vein and 3.1% in the internal iliac vein). Conclusion: In our patient cohort, 70 women demonstrated 14 different SV classifications. The most common was S2V2, found in 10 patients. Chronic pelvic pain of venous origin, S2 disease, was the most common symptom, present in 47 patients (67.1%); followed by extra-pelvic symptoms as 22 patients demonstrated symptoms of the external genitalia (S3a), and 21 patients had symptoms secondary to the non-saphenous leg veins (S3b). Pelvic varicosities, V2, were also the most common variceal pattern seen in 53 patients, and 17 patients did not have any varices noted by venogram. Non-thrombotic IVS either alone or with ovarian vein reflux was the most common cause of PeVD in this cohort and may reflect referral patterns to our center. To determine the true incidence of these SVP patterns, larger cohort studies are necessary.

Transabdominal ultrasound accurately identifies a significant iliac vein area-reducing lesion in patients with pelvic venous insufficiency.

BACKGROUND: In patients with pelvic venous disorders secondary to pelvic venous insufficiency (PVI), the optimal imaging modality is ill-defined. Transabdominal ultrasound (TAU) is widely used to identify the presence of iliac vein stenosis. The purpose of the present investigation is to determine the accuracy of TAU for determining the presence of an iliac vein area-reducing lesion compared with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). METHODS: From January to December 2020, a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from 96 patients treated for symptomatic PVI at the Center for Vascular Medicine was performed. All patients had complete history and physical examination findings, demographics, CEAP (clinical, etiologic, anatomic, pathophysiologic), revised venous clinical severity score, and TAU, diagnostic venography, and IVUS measurements recorded in our electronic medical record system. All TAU measurements were performed by the same ultrasound technician with the patient in the supine position. Iliac vein diameters of the common femoral, external iliac, and common iliac veins and the inferior vena cava were obtained. Differences in body habitus were normalized by dividing the minimum diameter measurement of the stenotic vessel with that of the ipsilateral common femoral vein, subtracting this number from 1 and multiplying by 100 (stenosis = [1 - minimal diameter/common femoral diameter] × 100). The normalized stenoses were then compared with the IVUS-derived area reducing measurements. A receiver operating characteristic curve was created, and logistic regression analysis for the probability of predicting an area-reducing lesion of >50% and >60% with TAU was performed. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. RESULTS: The average age of the entire cohort was 49.8 ± 13.5 years, with 69 women and 27 men. The CEAP distribution was as follows: C0, 5%; C1, 5%; C2, 10%; C3, 40%; C4a,b, 30%; C5, 7%; and C6, 3%. The average revised venous clinical severity score was 6.2 ± 2.6. The indications for intervention were leg symptoms alone in 43%, pelvic symptoms alone in 3%, and combined leg and pelvic symptoms in 54%. TAU identified a stenosis of ≥50% in 92 of the 96 patients (96%). For a ≥50% stenosis, a normalized diameter of ≤3 mm demonstrated a sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of 75%, 75%, 98%, and 12%, respectively. Logistic regression analysis indicated that TAU was significant in predicting the presence of a ≥60% area-reducing lesion (odds ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.05; P = .009). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (c-statistic) was 68.6%. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were 66.7%, 66.7%, 81.5%, and 47.6%, respectively, for a normalized diameter of ≥4 mm. CONCLUSIONS: The ability of TAU to identify an iliac vein stenosis of ≥50% is 96%. The positive predictive value for TAU to identify a ≥60% iliac vein area-reducing lesion is high, with moderate sensitivity and specificity. For patients with symptoms consistent with pelvic venous disorders secondary to PVI, TAU is a good preintervention screening modality for properly trained vascular imaging specialists with findings that correlate well with IVUS measurements.

A practice audit of short-term outcomes of Wallstents versus Venovo stents for the treatment of nonthrombotic iliac vein outflow stenoses.

OBJECTIVE: The Wallstent (WS; Boston Scientific, Malborough, MA) is currently the standard of care for comparisons of clinical efficacy for new stent devices in the treatment of iliac vein outflow disease. Many vein-specific Nitinol-based stents have been now approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in the iliofemoral venous system. However, few comparisons of these devices to the current standard have been reported. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the complication and reintervention rates between the WS and Venovo stent (VS; BD, Franklin Lakes, NJ). METHODS: A random sample of 100 WS and 100 VS cases performed from April 2018 through December 2020 were selected for retrospective analysis. The demographics, presenting symptoms, and CEAP (Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, Pathophysiology) class were assessed. The complication logs and 90-day follow-up data were reviewed for every case to assess the incidence of postoperative deep vein thrombosis, stent thrombosis, in-stent restenosis, bleeding, and transient back pain. RESULTS: WSs had been placed more often in the left common iliac vein segment (52 vs 1), and VSs had been placed more often in the left common iliac vein and external iliac vein segments (36 vs 63; P = .0069). The average diameter and length of the WSs and VSs were 19.7 ± 2.2 mm vs 15 ± 1.4 mm (P = 2.4∗10-44) and 80.8 ± 9 mm vs 117.6 ± 20.4 mm (P = 2.4∗10-38), respectively. The average number of stents per patient was 1.05 for the WSs and 1.03 for the VSs (P = .47). The reintervention rates were similar between the two groups: WS, n = 5; and VS, n = 4 (P = .74). Four of the five WS reinterventions were stent extensions to treat in-stent restenosis and recurrence of symptoms, and one was secondary to occlusion requiring ipsilateral venoplasty and stenting. Two of the four VS reinterventions were venoplasty for in-stent restenosis and two were stent extensions for symptom recurrence. Transient back pain was the most common complication (WS, 37%; VS, 47%; P = 0.28). Insertion site deep vein thrombosis had developed in the three patients in the WS group and four patients in the VS group (P = .71). No patient had experienced bleeding requiring hospitalization, and no stent fractures, stent migration, or deaths had occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The complication and reintervention rates between the WS and VS groups were similar. Both stents demonstrated evidence of in-stent stenosis requiring reintervention. Implanted VSs tended to be smaller in diameter and longer in length and covered the common and external iliac veins more often compared with the WSs. Therefore, one VS can be used to cover two territories compared with the WS for which two stents will be required to cover the same vein territory length.

Pregnancy after iliac vein stenting for pelvic venous insufficiency.

BACKGROUND: The use of iliac vein stenting for the treatment of pelvic pain secondary to pelvic venous insufficiency has significantly increased. In women of childbearing age, the effect of the gravid uterus on stent function and patency is unclear. The purpose of this investigation was to determine the effect of pregnancy on stent patency and reintervention rate in women with iliac vein stents. METHODS: A retrospective chart review and email survey was performed to identify women treated at the Center for Vascular Medicine who were treated with iliac vein stenting and who had subsequent pregnancies. Medical and surgical comorbidities, stent type, location, length, number of stents, reintervention rates, number of pregnancies after stenting, anticoagulation usage during pregnancy, and type of delivery were assessed. RESULTS: From January 2014 to December 2020, 15 women with 16 iliac vein stents and who had 17 subsequent pregnancies were identified. The average age at stenting was 35.3 ± 4.13 years. The average interval between stenting and conception was 350 ± 287 days. Before pregnancy, stent location was in the right common/right external iliac veins in 1 patient and left common/external iliac veins in 14 patients. The average stent diameter and length were 19.6 ± 3 and 79.5 ± 20.3 mm, respectively. Thirteen Boston Scientific Wallstents and three Bard Venovo stents were used before pregnancy. One patient with a Wallstent required a stent extension before pregnancy and one patient had two stents placed at the initial procedure. Two women were pregnant twice after stenting for a total of 17 pregnancies. There were 16 term and 1 premature delivery of single infants. Patients were treated with enoxaparin (Lovenox) for stent-related thrombosis prophylaxis in 11 of 17 pregnancies, 5 had no prophylaxis, and the status of 1 pregnancy is unknown. One asymptomatic patient underwent a stent venoplasty after delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Iliac vein stents tolerate a gravid uterus well. No stents thrombosed during or after pregnancy and none required reintervention secondary to pregnancy-related compression. Anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin should be considered for stent thrombosis prophylaxis. Potential pregnancy should not be considered a contraindication to iliac vein stenting for the treatment of symptomatic pelvic venous insufficiency.

Iliac vein stenting is safe when performed in an office based laboratory setting.

BACKGROUND: Venous stenting for iliac vein outflow obstruction is associated with excellent long-term stent patency and symptom resolution. However, the safety of iliac vein stenting performed in an office-based laboratory (OBL) setting is not well-defined. The purpose of our investigation was to determine the safety profile of iliac vein stenting in an OBL setting. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected in the Center for Vascular Medicine electronic medical record system (NextGen Healthcare Information System, Irvine, Calif) and retrospectively analyzed. Standardized patient safety and sedation protocols were used in accordance with the accreditation standards of the Joint Commission for Accreditation of Hospital Organizations for office-based surgery centers. Patient consultations, interventions, and follow-up at 1 to 6 weeks were included in the present analysis. All the patients had received moderate sedation during their procedure. Complications requiring hospitalization were classified as major complications. Minor complications consisted of bleeding, hematoma, vasovagal response, in-stent thrombosis resulting in complete occlusion of the iliac vein stent, an allergic reaction, hematemesis, hypotension, pelvic discomfort, and pseudoaneurysm. RESULTS: Between January 2015 and January 2019, 1223 iliac vein stents were placed in 1104 patients (23.7% male; 76.3% female). A total of 90 minor complications (7.36%) and 5 major complications (0.41%) were observed. The major complications included the following: one allergic reaction, one episode of atrial fibrillation, one episode of supraventricular tachycardia, one episode of chest pain, and one case of acute stent occlusion. The minor complications were primarily insertion site hematomas. No complications were related to sedation or acute renal failure. No patient died. CONCLUSIONS: Major complications were rare after iliac vein stenting in an OBL setting. Minor complications were primarily insertion site hematomas, which did not require inpatient hospitalization. Our analysis has shown that iliac vein stenting in an OBL setting is a safe and well-tolerated procedure.

Immediate postprocedure anticoagulation with factor Xa inhibitors of venous stents for nonthrombotic venous lesions does not increase stent patency.

BACKGROUND: Many clinicians will prescribe anticoagulation therapy for patients after iliac vein stenting to prevent early or late stent thrombosis. At present, it is unknown whether therapeutic anticoagulation has any effect on stent patency. Thus, we assessed the role of short-term anticoagulation on iliac vein stent patency in patients with nonthrombotic iliac vein lesions (NIVLs). METHODS: We performed a retrospective medical record review of all iliac vein stents placed for NIVLs at the Center for Vascular Medicine from January 2018 to December 2019. We compared the stent patency in the two groups. The anticoagulation (AC) group had received rivaroxaban or apixaban postoperatively for a minimum of 90 days and were compared with a group that had received no postoperative anticoagulation (NAC). Stent patency was assessed using transabdominal ultrasound at 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 30 months. At the discretion of the treating physician, the patients who demonstrated thrombus layering on surveillance ultrasound scanning continued rivaroxaban or apixaban until thrombus resolution was observed. The demographics and stent location, diameter, and length were assessed. Stent patency was analyzed using life table analyses. Differences in stent patency were analyzed using GraphPad Prism, version 8, statistical software (GraphPad Software Inc, La Jolla, Calif) and the log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test. RESULTS: The number of patients and stents in each group were as follows: AC group, 299 patients and 308 stents; and NAC group, 77 patients and 90 stents. The average age was 52.24 ± 13.44 years and 55.63 ± 14.49 years in the AC and NAC groups, respectively (P ≤ .065). Women constituted 76% of the patients in the AC group and 72% in the NAC group. The average stent diameter and length for the AC group was 20 ± 2 mm and 77 ± 13 mm and for the NAC group was 19 ± 2 mm and 82 ± 9 mm, respectively. The stents had been placed in the right common iliac vein, bilaterally, or left common iliac vein territory in 15%, 3%, and 82% in the AC group and 18%, 2%, and 80% in the NAC group, respectively. The cumulative stent patency at 30 months was 98.7% and 94.6% for the NAC and AC groups, respectively (P ≤ .83). All the stents placed were Wallstents (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Mass). A total of eight insertion site thromboses occurred that did not affect stent patency: five in the AC group (1.6%) and three in the NAC group (4.5%; P = .15). In addition, 19 patients demonstrated evidence of thrombus layering, with 6 receiving extended anticoagulation. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that perioperative stent thrombosis in patients with NIVLs is uncommon. Thus, anticoagulation for perioperative stent thrombosis prophylaxis is not necessary. Anticoagulation should only be used for patients with insertion site thromboses and should be considered if thrombus layering is observed on surveillance scanning.

Pelvic venous insufficiency secondary to iliac vein stenosis and ovarian vein reflux treated with iliac vein stenting alone.

BACKGROUND: We have previously reported that in women with a pelvic venous disorder secondary to pelvic venous insufficiency, 56% will present with an iliac vein stenosis (IVS) and ovarian vein reflux (OVR). The purpose of the present investigation was to determine whether women with combined disease can be treated using iliac vein stenting alone. METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data at the Center for Vascular Medicine was performed. We investigated women with pelvic pain or dyspareunia secondary to combined IVS and OVR who had undergone stenting alone. The patient demographics, pre- and 6-month postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) for pain scores, stent type, stent diameter, stent length, and ovarian vein diameters were assessed. All patients had undergone diagnostic venography of their pelvic veins, left ovarian veins, and pelvic reservoirs and intravascular ultrasonography of their iliac veins. RESULTS: From May 2016 to October 2019, 82 patients with a pelvic venous disorder secondary to IVS and OVR were identified. The present data analysis focused on 38 patients with complete pre- and postoperative VAS scores and duplex scan stent patency data at 6 months. The pelvic and dyspareunia VAS scores at the initial and 6-month follow-up visits were as follows: 6.83 ± 3.19 and 4.24 ± 2.65 and 1.72 ± 2.01 and 0.05 ± 2.0, respectively (P ≤ .001). At 6 months, 29 of the 38 women (76%) reported complete resolution of all symptoms, 26 of 28 (93%) reported complete resolution of their dyspareunia, 5 of 38 (13%) reported significant improvement, and 4 of 38 (10%) reported no improvement. The average ovarian vein diameter was 6.7 ± 2.5 mm. The average stent size and length was 18.20 ± 1.6 mm and 92.41 ± 18.5 mm, with 25 placed in the left common iliac, 2 in the right common iliac vein, and 3 bilaterally. Of the 38 patients, 7 required reintervention (18%). An untreated pelvic reservoir was observed in 17 of the 38 patients (44%). One of the two with no response and six of the patients with improvement had OVR and an untreated pelvic reservoir. The remaining 10 patients with a pelvic reservoir had experienced complete resolution of their symptoms with stenting alone. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 38 women with pelvic pain secondary to combined IVS and OVR, 76% achieved complete symptom resolution with iliac vein stenting alone. Most of the women with a pelvic reservoir were asymptomatic and reported full symptom resolution after stenting alone. However, these data suggest that in some women, a relationship might exist between the presence of a pelvic reservoir and the persistence of symptoms. Therefore, for women with combined IVS and OVR, we recommend iliac vein stenting alone and staged ovarian vein embolization only for women with persistent symptoms.

Type of anti-thrombotic therapy for venous stenting in patients with non-thrombotic iliac vein lesions does not influence the development of in-stent restenosis.

BACKGROUND: In patients receiving stents for symptomatic non-thrombotic iliac vein lesions, many clinicians prescribe anti-thrombotic medications. Whether or not anti-coagulation post-venous stenting improves stent patency is unknown. The aim of this investigation is to determine whether prophylactic post-operative anti-thrombotic therapy improves stent patency and/or prevents in-stent restenosis. METHODS: The medical records and venous ultrasounds for 389 patients stented for non-thrombotic iliac vein lesions were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized into three anti-thrombotic regimens: Clopidogrel, Aspirin and Clopidogrel, and Apixaban or Rivaroxaban. Patients were routinely assessed for restenosis and stent patency at 6, 26, and 52 weeks and treated with anti-thrombotics for 90 days. RESULTS: Freedom from in-stent restenosis at 6, 26, and 52 weeks were Clopidogrel (91.50, 82.91, 80.95%), Aspirin and Clopidogrel (88.68, 80.03, 80.03%), and Apixaban or Rivaroxaban (91.03, 85.11, 83.18%). Primary patencies were Clopidogrel (98.77, 98.77, 98.10%), Aspirin and Clopidogrel (100, 95.74, 95.74%), and Apixaban or Rivaroxaban (98.70, 98.70, 96.71%). There were no statistically significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: The type of post-operative anti-thrombotic therapy for non-thrombotic iliac vein lesions does not appear to improve stent patency or prevent the development of in-stent restenosis.

Iliac vein stenosis is an underdiagnosed cause of pelvic venous insufficiency.

BACKGROUND: Reflux in the ovarian veins, with or without an obstructive venous outflow component, is reported to be the primary cause of pelvic venous insufficiency (PVI). The degree to which venous outflow obstruction plays a role in PVI is currently ill-defined. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 227 women with PVI who presented to the Center for Vascular Medicine from January 2012 to September 2015. Assessments and interventions consisted of an evaluation for other causes of chronic pelvic pain by a gynecologist; preintervention and postintervention visual analog scale (VAS) pain score; complete venous duplex ultrasound examination; and Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, and Pathophysiology classification. All patients underwent diagnostic venography of their pelvic and left ovarian veins as well as intravascular ultrasound of their iliac veins. Patients were treated in one of six ways: ovarian vein embolization (OVE) alone (chemical ± coils), OVE with staged iliac vein stenting, OVE with simultaneous iliac vein stenting, iliac vein stenting alone, OVE with venoplasty, and venoplasty alone. RESULTS: Of the 227 women treated, the average age and number of pregnancies was 46.4 ± 10.4 years and 3.36 ± 1.99, respectively. Treatment distribution was the following: OVE, n = 39; OVE with staged stenting, n = 94; OVE with simultaneous stenting, n = 33; stenting alone, n = 50; OVE with venoplasty, n = 8; and venoplasty alone, n = 3. Seven patients in the OVE and stenting groups (staged) and one patient in the OVE + venoplasty group required a second embolization of the left ovarian vein. Eighty percent (181/227) of patients demonstrated an iliac stenosis >50% by intravascular ultrasound. Average VAS scores for the entire cohort before and after intervention were 8.45 ± 1.11 and 1.86 ± 1.61 (P ≤ .001). In the staged group, only 9 of 94 patients reported a decrease in the VAS score with OVE alone. VAS score decreased from 8.6 ± 0.89 before OVE to 7.97 ± 2.10 after OVE. After the planned staged stenting, VAS score decreased to 1.33 ± 2.33 (P ≤ .001). Similarly, in the simultaneous group, preintervention scores were 8.63 ± 1.07 and decreased to 2.36 ± 2.67 after OVE + stenting (P ≤ .001). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients in our series (80%) demonstrated a significant iliac vein stenosis. These observations indicate that the incidence of iliac vein outflow obstruction in PVI is greater than previously reported. In patients with combined ovarian vein reflux and iliac vein outflow obstruction, our data suggest that pelvic venous outflow lesions should be treated first and that ovarian vein reflux should be treated only if symptoms persist. In women with an outflow lesion, ovarian vein reflux, and a large pelvic reservoir, we recommend simultaneous treatment.

Cardiac troponin I release in acute pulmonary embolism in relation to the duration of symptoms.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the release of cardiac troponin I in normotensive patients with acute pulmonary embolism in relation to the duration of symptoms. METHODS: Fifty-seven normotensive patients with acute pulmonary embolism were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups based on the duration of symptoms at presentation: symptoms of < or =72 h, group A; symptoms of >72 h, group B. Serum cardiac troponin I levels were measured at presentation. RESULTS: Mean age was 63+/-18 years and 23 (40%) patients were males. Thirty-three (58%) patients had symptoms of < or =72 h (group A) and 24 (42%) had symptoms of >72 h (group B). Both groups had similar prevalence of right ventricular dysfunction on echocardiography (55% [n=18] in group A vs. 42% [n=10] in group B, p=NS). Sixteen patients had elevated serum cardiac troponin I (mean+/-S.D. 3.3+/-2.3 ng/ml, range 0.6-8.3 ng/ml). Elevated serum cardiac troponin I was strongly associated with right ventricular dysfunction (p=0.015). All patients with elevated serum cardiac troponin I (n=16) were in group A (p<0.0001). Twelve of 18 (67%) patients with (p=0.0005) and 4 of 15 (27%) patients without (p=NS) right ventricular dysfunction had elevated serum cardiac troponin I. Thirteen of 16 (81%) patients with elevated serum cardiac troponin I had duration of symptoms < or =24 h at presentation. CONCLUSIONS: The dynamics of cardiac troponin I release in acute pulmonary embolism in patients who present with symptoms of < or =72 h duration could be different from those who present with longer duration of symptoms. Therefore, the use of cardiac troponin I in risk stratification of acute pulmonary embolism might be limited to the patients presenting within 72 h of the onset of symptoms.

Effect of thrombolytic therapy on QT dispersion in elderly versus younger patients with acute myocardial infarction.

The objective of this study was to assess the degree of QT dispersion and effect of thrombolytic therapy on QT dispersion in elderly (age > or =65 years) versus younger (age <65 years) patients with acute myocardial infarction. The QT dispersion was measured manually in 10 +/- 2 leads of 12-lead electrocardiograms on admission, at completion of thrombolytic therapy, and at day 2 after thrombolytic therapy in 36 elderly (73 +/- 5.7 years) and 36 younger (59.9 +/- 7.7 years) patients with acute myocardial infarction. Before initiation of thrombolytic therapy, elderly patients had higher absolute and corrected QT dispersion than younger patients (absolute QT dispersion: 76.3 +/- 7.3 versus 69.6 +/- 7.5 milliseconds, respectively, P < 0.0001; corrected QT dispersion: 77.9 +/- 7.6 versus 70.8 +/- 7.4 milliseconds, respectively, P < 0.001). The difference in QT dispersion between elderly and younger patients persisted at the completion of thrombolytic therapy (absolute QT dispersion: 75.1 +/- 7.2 versus 69.1 +/- 8.4 milliseconds, respectively, P = 0.001; corrected QT dispersion: 77.2 +/- 7.2 versus 70.7 +/- 8.0 milliseconds, respectively, P = 0.001) and at day 2 after thrombolytic therapy (absolute QT dispersion: 74.1 +/- 8.2 versus 69 +/- 9.1 milliseconds, respectively, P = 0.01; corrected QT dispersion: 76.0 +/- 7.9 versus 70.5 +/- 8.8 milliseconds, respectively, P = 0.006). Compared with the prethrombolytic values, there was no significant change in absolute and corrected QT dispersion at the completion of thrombolytic therapy or at day 2 after thrombolytic therapy in elderly or younger patients. Elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction have higher QT dispersion than younger patients with acute myocardial infarction, and QT dispersion does not change early after thrombolytic therapy in elderly or younger patients.