Impact of antidepressant and antipsychotic use in the occurence of torsades de pointes arrhythmia: a case-control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: Psychotropic drugs may prolong the corrected QT interval (QTc), which has been associated with torsades de pointes (TdP). Our aim is to measure the relative impact of psychotropic drug use on TdP. A case-control study was conducted on 110 cases of confirmed TdP, and 330 matched controls. Hierarchical regression was performed by first including pre-identified risk factors (including demographic, medical conditions, and drugs such as antiarrhythmics) and then psychotropic drugs (antidepressants and antipsychotics). Population attributable risks (PAR) were calculated. RESULTS: At the time of admission, TdP was the primary, secondary, or complication diagnosis in 32.7 %, 30.9 %, and 36.4 % of cases, respectively. There were more patients with TdP who died during hospitalization compared to controls (7.3 % vs. 2.7 %, p < 0.05), but TdP was the cause of death in only two (1.8 %) of them. In our final regression model, age, hepatic and/or renal failure and antidepressant/antipsychotic drug monotherapy were not associated with TdP. On the other hand, the use of other QTc-prolonging drugs, female sex, left ventricular dysfunction, acute myocardial infarction, hypokalemia, and use of ≥ 2 antidepressants were all significantly associated with TdP, with PAR of 55.3 %, 41.8 %, 26.2 %, 13.0 %, 11.7 %, and 6.3 % respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In analyses adjusting for concomitant conditions/drugs, antidepressant or antipsychotic monotherapy was not associated with TdP while the use of ≥ 2 antidepressants was. However in terms of PAR, the use of other QTc-prolonging drug, including antiarrhythmics, sex, and left ventricular dysfunction carried a higher burden than the use of ≥2 antidepressants. These findings may inform and assist in balancing the risks and benefits of psychotropic drugs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".