PubMed · 8717888
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
C Humm. 1996-06-12. A shift in time.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8717888/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
To evaluate the potential prognostic value of the circadian variation of QT intervals in predicting sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients after myocardial infarction (MI), 15 pairs of post-MI patients (15 died suddenly within 1 year after MI [SCD victims] and 15 remained event-free [MI survivors]) were studied (mean age 60 +/- 8 years; 24 men and 6 women). The pairs were matched for age, gender, infarct site, presence of Q wave, left ventricular ejection fraction, thrombolytic and beta-blocker therapy. Fourteen normal subjects served as controls (mean age 55 +/- 9 years; 12 men). A 24-hour Holter electrocardiographic (ECG) recording was obtained from each subject. All recordings were analyzed using a Holter ECG analyser. QT, RR, and heart rate-corrected QT intervals (QTc) were automatically calculated by the analyzer, and hourly and 24-hour mean values of each measurement were derived from each recording. There was a pronounced circadian variation in the QT interval in parallel with the trend in the RR interval in normal subjects and in MI survivors. Circadian variation in both indexes was blunted in SCD victims. The QT interval was significantly longer at night than during the day in normal subjects (388 +/- 28 vs 355 +/- 21 ms, p = 0.001) and in MI survivors (358 +/- 25 vs 346 +/- 15 ms, p = 0.008), but not in SCD victims (357 +/- 32 vs 350 +/- 31 ms, p = 0.6). The 24-hour mean value of the QT interval in SCD victims did not differ significantly from that in normal subjects or MI survivors. The QT interval at night was significantly shorter in SCD victims than in normal subjects (357 +/- 32 vs 388 +/- 28 ms, p = 0.02), but daytime values were similar. The QT interval in SCD victims did not differ significantly from that of MI survivors at any time. The QTc interval exhibited a small circadian variation in normal subjects. This variation was abolished in SCD victims and MI survivors. The 24-hour mean value of QTc was significantly longer in SCD victims than in normal subjects (424 +/- 25 vs 402 +/- 21 ms, p = 0.02), and in MI survivors (424 +/- 25 vs 404 +/- 32 ms, p < 0.05). The QTc interval of SCD victims differed from that of normal subjects during both the day (421 +/- 25 vs 400 +/- 17 ms, p = 0.02) and night (424 +/- 26 vs 403 +/- 23 ms, p = 0.03). Thus, blunted circadian variation in QT intervals, abolished circadian variation in QTc intervals, and prolonged QTc intervals may suggest an increased risk of SCD in patients after MI.
Wrist actigraphy is increasingly used to track circadian rest-activity cycles and to identify states of wakefulness and sleep, yet the measurement characteristics of activity recorders have never been compared. Two widely used recorders are compared here: the MotionLogger from Ambulatory Monitoring, Inc (AM) and the Gaehwiler (G). They were worn together on the same wrist for periods averaging 41.5 hours by five members of a research team. Activity counts were stored every half-minute. Pairwise comparisons between recorders of each type showed both types to be reliable. Each also validly detected circadian rest/activity cycles. Both types suffered, however, from insensitivity. For the lower 75% of activity levels, the variance of data from the G was indeed so small as to be essentially uninformative. Since these levels include over 95% of all nocturnal data, the G must be less sensitive than the AM to small nocturnal movements, including those signifying arousal. An additional difference is that data from the AM but not the G were distributed in biphasic fashion. Biphasic activity levels are consistent with the common assumption that activity/wakefulness and rest/sleep are distinct neurobehavioral states. As the use of actigraphy increases, the important differences found here between two leading instruments point to an urgent need for standards by which activity recorders can be compared. Aspects of instrument design that could be quantitatively rated are reliability, validity, ruggedness and artifact rejection.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the protein:creatinine ratio in spot morning urine samples is a reliable indicator of 24 hour urinary protein excretion and predicts the rate of decline of glomerular filtration rate and progression to end stage renal failure in non-diabetic patients with chronic nephropathy. DESIGN: Cross sectional correlation between the ratio and urinary protein excretion rate. Univariate and multivariate analysis of baseline predictors, including the ratio and 24 hour urinary protein, of decline in glomerular filtration rate and end stage renal failure in the long term. SETTING: Research centre in Italy. SUBJECTS: 177 non-diabetic outpatients with chronic renal disease screened for participation in the ramipril efficacy in nephropathy study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of decline in filtration rate evaluated by repeated measurements of unlabelled iohexol plasma clearance and rate of progression to renal failure. RESULTS: Protein:creatinine ratio was significantly correlated with absolute and log transformed 24 hour urinary protein values (P = 0.0001 and P < 0.0001, respectively.) Ratios also had high predictive value for rate of decline of the glomerular filtration rate (univariate P = 0.0003, multivariate P = 0.004) and end stage renal failure (P = 0.002 and P = 0.04). Baseline protein:creatinine ratios and rate of decline of the glomerular filtration rate were also significantly correlated (P < 0.0005). In the lowest third of the protein:creatinine ratio (< 1.7) there was 3% renal failure compared with 21.2% in the highest third (> 2.7) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Protein:creatinine ratio in spot morning urine samples is a precise indicator of proteinuria and a reliable predictor of progression of disease in non-diabetic patients with chronic nephropathies and represents a simple and inexpensive procedure in establishing severity of renal disease and prognosis.