Contents
Download PDF
pdf Download XML
39 Views
15 Downloads
Share this article
Research Article | Volume 16 Issue 10 (OCTOBER, 2026) | Pages 32 - 39
Assessment of the T Peak-T End Interval Reduction on Surface ECG as a Marker of Successful Fibrinolytic Therapy for ST Segment Myocardial Infarction (STEMI): A Cross-Sectional Study in Tertiary Care Centre of Central India
 ,
1
Associate Professor, Department of General Medicine, Government Medical College, Nagpur
2
Junior Resident, Department of General Medicine, Government Medical College, Nagpur
Under a Creative Commons license
Open Access
Received
Sept. 28, 2026
Revised
Oct. 15, 2026
Accepted
Oct. 22, 2026
Published
Oct. 23, 2026
Abstract

Background: Objective: Early assessment of myocardial reperfusion after fibrinolytic therapy is essential in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The T peak–T end (Tp–e) interval reflects transmural dispersion of ventricular repolarization and may serve as a simple electrocardiographic marker of successful reperfusion. The present study aimed to evaluate the reduction in Tp-e interval post-fibrinolysis as a marker of successful reperfusion in STEMI patients in the Central Indian population.  Methods: This cross-sectional study included 119 consecutive adult STEMI patients (18–80 years) who underwent fibrinolysis within 12 hours of symptom onset. Baseline characteristics, and 12-lead ECG were performed before fibrinolysis. A repeat ECG was obtained 90 minutes after fibrinolysis to assess ST-segment resolution and Tp–e interval. Reduction in Tp–e interval (ΔTp–e) was calculated, and patients were classified as having successful or failed fibrinolysis based on ≥50% ST-segment resolution.  Results: Successful reperfusion was achieved in 76 (63.9%) patients. The median Tp–e interval decreased significantly from 95 (82–110) ms before fibrinolysis to 78 (66–92) ms after fibrinolysis (p<0.001). Patients with successful fibrinolysis showed a greater reduction in Tp–e interval than those with failed fibrinolysis [22 (16–30) ms vs. 8 (4–14) ms; p<0.001]. A ΔTp–e ≥15 ms was independently associated with successful reperfusion (OR: 9.36; 95% CI: 4.02–21.78; p<0.001). ROC analysis demonstrated good diagnostic performance (AUC: 0.84), with 76.3% sensitivity, 74.4% specificity, and 75.6% overall accuracy. Prolonged baseline Tp–e interval and lower ΔTp–e was also significantly associated with ventricular arrhythmias and in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (p<0.001).  Conclusion: Reduction in the Tp–e interval is a simple, non-invasive, and reliable ECG marker of successful fibrinolysis and provides valuable prognostic information for early risk stratification in STEMI patients.

Keywords
INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular diseases remain the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, accounting for approximately 17.9 million deaths annually, representing nearly 32% of all global deaths.1 Among these, ischemic heart disease constitutes the major burden, with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) being a critical and life-threatening manifestation.2 ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) being a life-threatening form of acute coronary syndrome requiring prompt reperfusion therapy to reduce myocardial damage and mortality.3,4

 

Although primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preferred strategy where available, fibrinolytic therapy remains a vital treatment modality, particularly in resource-limited settings including India, where timely PCI is not feasible Successful fibrinolysis, is traditionally assessed by ST-segment resolution, relief of chest pain, and

 

reperfusion arrhythmias; however, these markers have

limitations.5,6 Therefore, newer non-invasive electrocardiographic markers such as the T peak–T end (Tp–Te) interval, which reflects ventricular repolarization dispersion, have emerged as promising indicators of successful myocardial reperfusion.7,8

 

The Tpeak–Tend interval is defined as the time interval between the peak of the T wave and the end of the T wave on a surface electrocardiogram. It is considered an index of transmural dispersion of repolarization, representing differences in repolarization times among epicardial, mid-myocardial (M cells), and endocardial layers of the ventricular myocardium.9 In STEMI, myocardial ischemia increases repolarization heterogeneity, resulting in prolongation of the Tp–Te interval, whereas successful reperfusion restores electrical stability and shortens this interval.10,11 Although ST-segment resolution remains the standard marker of successful fibrinolysis, it has important limitations.12 Recent studies have shown that reduction in the Tp–Te interval after fibrinolytic therapy correlates with successful reperfusion, lower risk of ventricular arrhythmias, and better clinical outcomes.13,14 However, evidence from the Indian population remains limited. Therefore, this study was undertaken to evaluate the reduction in the Tp–Te interval as a simple, non-invasive marker of successful fibrinolytic therapy in STEMI patients at a tertiary care centre in Central India.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After obtaining approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee and written informed consent was obtained from all participants or their legally authorized representatives, hospital-based, observational, cross-sectional study was carried out in the Department of General Medicine in collaboration with the Department of Cardiology at a tertiary care teaching hospital in Central India. A total of 119 consecutive adult patients (18–80 years) with STEMI who underwent fibrinolytic therapy within 12 hours of symptom onset and had both pre-fibrinolytic and post-fibrinolytic 12-lead ECGs available for analysis were enrolled. Patients with non-STEMI or unstable angina, prior PCI or CABG, significant baseline arrhythmias, severe comorbid conditions (including end-stage renal disease, liver failure, or terminal illness), incomplete or poor-quality ECG recordings precluding accurate measurement of the T peak–T end (Tp–Te) interval, pregnant or lactating women, and those unable to provide informed consent were excluded from the study.

 

Eligible STEMI patients underwent detailed clinical evaluation, baseline laboratory investigations, and a 12-lead ECG before fibrinolytic therapy. Standard thrombolytic treatment and guideline-directed medical therapy were administered as per institutional protocol. A repeat ECG was performed 90 minutes after fibrinolysis to assess ST-segment resolution and measure the T peak–T end (Tp–Te) interval. The reduction in Tp–Te interval (ΔTp–Te) was calculated by comparing pre- and post-fibrinolysis values, and patients were categorized into successful or failed fibrinolysis groups based on ≥50% ST-segment resolution. Clinical outcomes, laboratory findings, and ECG parameters were systematically recorded in a structured case record form for analysis.

 

Statistical Methods

Data were analyzed using SPSS version 25.0. Continuous variables were compared using the independent or paired t-test/Mann–Whitney U test/Wilcoxon signed-rank test, while categorical variables were analyzed using the Chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to determine the optimal ΔTp–Te cutoff for predicting successful fibrinolysis. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

 

RESULTS

Among the 119 STEMI patients, the majority were aged 51–60 years (32.8%), male (72.3%), from rural areas (56.3%), and belonged to the middle socioeconomic class (48.7%). Hypertension (51.3%) and diabetes mellitus (41.2%) were common comorbidities. Anterior wall myocardial infarction was the most common infarct location (43.7%), 63.9% of patients presented with Killip class I, and 39.5% reached the hospital within 3–6 hours of symptom onset. All patients had elevated cardiac biomarkers. Elevated random blood glucose (≥200 mg/dL) was observed in 38.6%, hypertriglyceridemia in 53.8%, and hypercholesterolemia in 48.7% of patients, (Table 1).

 

Streptokinase was the most commonly used fibrinolytic agent (65.5%), and most patients received fibrinolysis within 31–60 minutes (41.2%). All patients received dual antiplatelet therapy, while the majority also received anticoagulation (87.4%), statins (95.0%), beta-blockers (76.5%), and ACE inhibitors/ARBs (73.9%). Successful reperfusion (≥50% ST-segment resolution) was achieved in 63.9% of patients. Complete chest pain relief was observed in 59.7%, and reperfusion arrhythmias occurred in 31.9% of patients, with accelerated idioventricular rhythm (AIVR) being the most common arrhythmia, followed by ventricular premature complexes (VPCs) and non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT), (Table 2).

 

There were no significant differences in age (p=0.62), sex (p=0.69), hypertension (p=0.46), diabetes mellitus (p=0.37), smoking status (p=0.43), type of myocardial infarction (p=0.21), or Killip class at presentation (p=0.56). However, earlier presentation (≤3 hours) was significantly more frequent among patients with successful fibrinolysis (35.5% vs. 16.3%), whereas presentation after 6–12 hours was more common in the failed fibrinolysis group (46.5% vs. 23.7%; p=0.02).

 

The median baseline Tp–e interval of 95 ms (IQR: 82–110) decreased to 78 ms (IQR: 66–92) postfibrinolysis, with a median reduction (ΔTp–e) of 17 ms (IQR: 10–26). This reduction was found to be statistically highly significant (p < 0.001), indicating improvement in ventricular repolarization following reperfusion therapy. Patients with successful fibrinolysis had significantly lower baseline and post-fibrinolysis Tp–e intervals and a greater reduction in Tp–e (ΔTp–e) compared with those with failed fibrinolysis (all p ≤0.01). A ΔTp–e ≥15 ms was significantly more common in the successful reperfusion group, whereas ΔTp–e <15 ms predominated in the failed group (p <0.001). Moreover, patients with ΔTp–e ≥15 ms had 9.36-fold higher odds of achieving successful reperfusion, indicating that ΔTp–e is a strong predictor of successful fibrinolytic therapy, (Table 3).

 

Patients with successful reperfusion showed a significantly greater reduction in the Tp–e interval than those with failed reperfusion, with the highest ΔTp–e observed in patients achieving complete chest pain relief (p<0.001). Patients with reperfusion arrhythmias also demonstrated a significantly greater ΔTp–e than those without arrhythmias (p=0.002), supporting its association with successful myocardial reperfusion, (Table 4). Additionally, there was a strong positive correlation between ΔTp–e and percentage ST-segment resolution (r = 0.62, p < 0.001), (Figure 1).

 

The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis demonstrated a good discriminative ability, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84 (95% CI: 0.76–0.91, p < 0.001). An optimal cutoff value of ΔTp–e ≥15 ms yielded a sensitivity of 76.3% and specificity of 74.4%. The positive predictive value was 84.1%, while the negative predictive value was 64.0%, with an overall diagnostic accuracy of 75.6%, (Figure 2).

 

Ventricular arrhythmias occurred in 34 (28.6%) patients, with ventricular premature complexes (VPCs) being the most common type (15/34, 44.1%), followed by non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) (32.4%), sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) (14.7%), and ventricular fibrillation (VF) (8.8%). In-hospital complications included heart failure in 29 (24.4%), cardiogenic shock in 11 (9.2%), reinfarction in 6 (5.0%), and in-hospital mortality in 8 (6.7%) patients. Patients who developed ventricular arrhythmias had significantly higher baseline and post-fibrinolysis Tp–e intervals, along with a significantly lower reduction in the Tp–e interval compared to those without arrhythmias (all p<0.001). Baseline Tp–e >100 ms and ΔTp–e <15 ms were significantly more frequent among patients with ventricular arrhythmias (p<0.001), (Table 5). Furthermore, baseline Tp–e >100 ms was associated with a 7.8-fold increased risk of ventricular arrhythmias, while ΔTp–e <15 ms was associated with a 6.67-fold increased risk. These findings indicate that prolonged baseline Tp–e interval and inadequate reduction following fibrinolysis are strong predictors of ventricular arrhythmias, reflecting persistent electrical instability.

 

Patients who developed in-hospital MACE had significantly higher baseline and post-fibrinolysis Tp–e intervals, along with a significantly lower reduction in the Tp–e interval compared to those without MACE (all p<0.001). Baseline Tp–e >100 ms and ΔTp–e <15 ms were significantly more common among patients with MACE than those without (p<0.001), (Table 6). A baseline Tp–e interval >100 ms was associated with an 8.35-fold increased risk of MACE (95% CI: 3.52–19.80). Similarly, a reduction in Tp–e interval (ΔTp–e) <15 ms was associated with a 6.56-fold increased risk of MACE (95% CI: 2.86–15.02).

 

Table 1: Baseline characteristics of study participants (n = 119)

Variables

Frequency (n)

Percentage (%)

Age (years)

18–40

14

11.8

41–50

28

23.5

51–60

39

32.8

61–70

25

21.0

>70

13

10.9

Sex

Male

86

72.3

Female

33

27.7

Residence

Urban

52

43.7

Rural

67

56.3

Socioeconomic Status

Lower

46

38.7

Middle

58

48.7

Upper

15

12.6

Hypertension

Present

61

51.3

Diabetes Mellitus

Present

49

41.2

Smoking Status

Current smoker

54

45.4

Former smoker

18

15.1

Non-smoker

47

39.5

Alcohol Consumption

Present

42

35.3

Dyslipidemia

Present

38

31.9

Family History of CAD

Present

21

17.6

Obesity (BMI ≥25 kg/m²)

Present

44

37.0

Time from Symptom Onset to Hospital Presentation

≤3 hours

34

28.6

3–6 hours

47

39.5

6–12 hours

38

31.9

Type of STEMI (Infarct Location)

Anterior wall MI

52

43.7

Inferior wall MI

41

34.5

Inferolateral MI

11

9.2

Extensive anterior MI

9

7.6

Other (Posterior/RV MI)

6

5.0

Killip Class at Presentation

Class I

76

63.9

Class II

24

20.2

Class III

13

10.9

Class IV

6

5.0

Chest Pain Duration Before Admission

<1 hour

19

16.0

1–3 hours

46

38.7

>3 hours

54

45.3

Heart Rate at Presentation (beats/min)

<60

8

6.7

60–100

79

66.4

>100

32

26.9

Systolic Blood Pressure at Presentation (mmHg)

<90

10

8.4

90–140

83

69.7

>140

26

21.9

Cardiac Biomarker (Troponin I / CK-MB)

Elevated

119

100.0

Not elevated

0

0.0

Random Blood Glucose (mg/dL)

<140

32

26.9

140–199

41

34.5

≥200

46

38.6

Serum Creatinine (mg/dL)

≤1.2

82

68.9

>1.2

37

31.1

Serum Potassium (mEq/L)

<3.5

18

15.1

3.5–5.0

86

72.3

>5.0

15

12.6

Serum Sodium (mEq/L)

<135

27

22.7

135–145

78

65.5

>145

14

11.8

Total Cholesterol (mg/dL)

<200

61

51.3

≥200

58

48.7

Triglycerides (mg/dL)

<150

55

46.2

≥150

64

53.8

Maximum ST-Segment Elevation (mm)

1–2 mm

21

17.6

2–4 mm

63

52.9

>4 mm

35

29.5

Number of Leads with ST Elevation

2–3 leads

48

40.3

4–5 leads

44

37.0

≥6 leads

27

22.7

Reciprocal ST Depression

Present

67

56.3

Absent

52

43.7

T Wave Morphology

Normal

18

15.1

Tall/Hyperacute

73

61.3

Inverted

28

23.6

QTc Interval (ms)

Normal (<440 ms)

64

53.8

Prolonged (≥440 ms)

55

46.2

Baseline Tp–e Interval (ms)

≤80 ms

26

21.8

81–100 ms

49

41.2

>100 ms

44

37.0

 

Table 2. Fibrinolytic therapy, and clinical and electrocardiographic markers of reperfusion after fibrinolytic therapy

Variables

Category

Frequency

Percentage

Fibrinolytic Therapy and Adjunctive Medical Treatment

Type of Fibrinolytic Agent Used

Streptokinase

78

65.5

Tenecteplase

41

34.5

Time to Fibrinolysis (Door-to-Needle Time)

≤30 minutes

36

30.3

31–60 minutes

49

41.2

>60 minutes

34

28.5

Antiplatelet Therapy

Aspirin + Clopidogrel

119

100.0

Anticoagulation Therapy

Heparin (UFH/LMWH)

104

87.4

Statin Therapy

Given

113

95.0

Beta-blockers

Given

91

76.5

ACE Inhibitors / ARBs

Given

88

73.9

Clinical and ECG markers of reperfusion

ST-Segment Resolution at 90 Minutes

≥50% (Successful reperfusion)

76

63.9

<50% (Failed reperfusion)

43

36.1

Chest Pain Relief After Fibrinolysis

Complete relief

71

59.7

Partial relief

29

24.4

No relief

19

15.9

Reperfusion Arrhythmias

Present

38

31.9

Absent

81

68.1

Type of Reperfusion Arrhythmia (n = 38)

AIVR

19

50.0

 VPCs

11

28.9

Non-sustained VT

6

15.8

Others

2

5.3

Table 3: Comparison of Tp–e Interval Parameters and Association of ΔTp–e with Successful Fibrinolysis

Parameter

Category

Successful Fibrinolysis

(n = 76)

Failed Fibrinolysis (n = 43)

p-value

Baseline Tp–e Interval (ms)

Median (IQR)

92 (80–104)

101 (88–116)

0.01*

Post-Fibrinolysis Tp–e Interval (ms)

Median (IQR)

70 (62–82)

92 (80–104)

<0.001*

Reduction in Tp–e Interval (ΔTp–e, ms)

Median (IQR)

22 (16–30)

8 (4–14)

<0.001*

ΔTp–e Interval

≥15 ms

58 (76.3%)

11 (25.6%)

<0.001*

<15 ms

18 (23.7%)

32 (74.4%)

 

Table 4: Correlation of Reduction in Tp–e Interval (ΔTp–e) with ST-Segment Resolution and Clinical Reperfusion Markers (n = 119)

Variable

Category

Median ΔTp–e Interval (ms) (IQR)

p-value

ST-Segment Resolution

≥50%

22 (16–30)

<0.001*

<50%

8 (4–14)

Chest Pain Relief

Complete relief

21 (15–28)

<0.001*

Partial relief

14 (8–20)

No relief

7 (3–12)

Reperfusion Arrhythmias

Present

20 (14–27)

0.002*

Absent

14 (8–22)

 

Table 5: Association of Tp–e Interval Parameters with Ventricular Arrhythmias (n = 119)

Parameter

Category

Ventricular Arrhythmias Present (n = 34)

Ventricular Arrhythmias Absent (n = 85)

p-value

Baseline Tp–e Interval (ms)

Median (IQR)

108 (96–122)

91 (79–103)

<0.001*

>100 ms

24 (70.6%)

20 (23.5%)

<0.001*

≤100 ms

10 (29.4%)

65 (76.5%)

Post-Fibrinolysis Tp–e Interval (ms)

Median (IQR)

94 (82–108)

73 (64–86)

<0.001*

Reduction in Tp–e Interval (ΔTp–e, ms)

Median (IQR)

9 (4–15)

20 (14–28)

<0.001*

<15 ms

25 (73.5%)

25 (29.4%)

<0.001*

≥15 ms

9 (26.5%)

60 (70.6%)

 

Table 6: Association of Tp–e Interval Parameters with In-Hospital Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE) (n = 119)

Parameters

Category

MACE Present

(n = 41)

MACE Absent (n = 78)

p-value

Baseline Tp–e Interval (ms)

Median (IQR)

106 (94–120)

90 (78–102)

<0.001*

>100 ms

28 (68.3%)

16 (20.5%)

<0.001*

≤100 ms

13 (31.7%)

62 (79.5%)

 

Post-Fibrinolysis Tp–e Interval (ms)

Median (IQR)

92 (80–106)

72 (63–84)

<0.001*

Reduction in Tp–e Interval (ΔTp–e, ms)

Median (IQR)

10 (5–16)

21 (15–29)

<0.001*

<15 ms

29 (70.7%)

21 (26.9%)

<0.001*

≥15 ms

12 (29.3%)

57 (73.1%)

DISCUSSION

In the present study, STEMI predominantly affected middle-aged males (72.3%), with most patients belonging to the 51–60-year age group (32.8%) and the majority originating from rural (56.3%), middle (48.7%), and lower (38.7%) socioeconomic backgrounds, findings comparable to those reported by De Luca et al4, Gupta et al15, and CREATE registry16. Hypertension, diabetes mellitus, smoking, dyslipidemia, obesity, and alcohol consumption were the major cardiovascular risk factors, consistent with previous Indian and international studies.15,17 Most patients presented 3–6 hours after symptom onset, with anterior wall myocardial infarction and Killip class I being the most common presentations, similar to findings from the CREATE registry16 and the GUSTO trial.18 All patients had elevated cardiac biomarkers, while hyperglycemia, renal dysfunction, electrolyte abnormalities, and dyslipidemia were frequently observed, in agreement with earlier reports.19,20 Baseline ECG findings showed moderate-to-severe ST-segment elevation, frequent reciprocal ST depression, QTc prolongation, and prolonged Tp–e intervals, indicating significant myocardial injury and repolarization abnormalities, consistent with observations by Birnbaum et al12 and Schröder et al6.

Streptokinase was the most commonly used fibrinolytic agent (65.5%), while 30.3% of patients received fibrinolysis within the recommended door-to-needle time of ≤30 minutes. Guideline-directed medical therapy was well adhered to, with dual antiplatelet therapy administered to all patients (100%), heparin to 87.4%, statins to 95.0%, beta-blockers to 76.5%, and ACE inhibitors/ARBs to 73.9%. These findings are comparable with the CREATE registry by Xavier et al16 and Schwartz GG et al.21 Successful reperfusion was achieved in 63.9% of patients, complete chest pain relief was observed in 59.7%, and reperfusion arrhythmias occurred in 31.9%, with accelerated idioventricular rhythm (50.0%) being the most common. These observations are consistent with the GUSTO trial18 and the study by Schröder et al.6 Time to presentation was significantly associated with reperfusion success (p=0.02). Patients presenting within ≤3 hours were more likely to achieve successful fibrinolysis (35.5% vs 16.3%), whereas delayed presentation (6–12 hours) was more frequent in the failed fibrinolysis group (46.5% vs 23.7%). These findings are consistent with previous studies done by De Luca et al4, and Schröder et al6.

 

In the present study, the Tp–e interval decreased significantly after fibrinolytic therapy from a median of 95 ms to 78 ms, with a median ΔTp–e of 17 ms (p<0.001), this finding is consistent with the study done by Antzelevitch et al8, Gupta et al15, Zhao et al22, and Panikkath et al.23 Patients with successful fibrinolysis had significantly lower baseline Tp–e intervals (92 ms vs. 101 ms; p=0.01), lower post-fibrinolysis Tp–e (70 ms vs. 92 ms; p<0.001), and a greater reduction in Tp–e (22 ms vs. 8 ms; p<0.001) than those with failed fibrinolysis. Similar observations have been reported by Antzelevitch et al8, Gupta et al15, Zhao et al22, and Wu et al24, who found greater Tp–e reduction in patients achieving successful myocardial reperfusion. A ΔTp–e ≥15 ms was observed in 76.3% of patients with successful fibrinolysis compared with 25.6% in the failed group and was associated with a 9.36-fold higher likelihood of successful reperfusion (95% CI: 4.02–21.78; p<0.001). These findings are in agreement with studies by Gupta et al15, Zhao et al22, and Panikkath et al.23 In the present study, ΔTp–e showed a strong association with established reperfusion markers. Patients with ≥50% ST-segment resolution had a significantly greater ΔTp–e (22 ms vs. 8 ms; p<0.001), with a strong positive correlation between ΔTp–e and ST-segment resolution (r=0.62; p<0.001). Greater ΔTp–e was also observed in patients with complete chest pain relief and reperfusion arrhythmias. The ROC analysis demonstrated good diagnostic performance of ΔTp–e for predicting successful fibrinolysis, with an AUC of 0.84, 76.3% sensitivity, 74.4% specificity, and 75.6% overall diagnostic accuracy. These findings are comparable with studies by Antzelevitch et al8, Schröder et al6, Zhao et al22, and Panikkath et al23.

 

In the present study, ventricular arrhythmias occurred in 28.6% of patients, with ventricular premature complexes (44.1%) being the most common, followed by non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (32.4%). Heart failure developed in 24.4%, cardiogenic shock in 9.2%, reinfarction in 5.0%, and in-hospital mortality was 6.7%. These findings are comparable with those reported by CREATE registry16, Eldar et al25, and Goldberg et al26. Patients who developed ventricular arrhythmias had significantly higher baseline Tp–e (108 vs. 91 ms), higher post-fibrinolysis Tp–e (94 vs. 73 ms), and lower ΔTp–e (9 vs. 20 ms) than those without arrhythmias (all p<0.001). Baseline Tp–e >100 ms and ΔTp–e <15 ms increased the risk of ventricular arrhythmias by 7.8-fold and 6.67-fold, respectively. These findings are consistent with studies by Antzelevitch et al8, Gupta et al15, and Panikkath et al23, highlighting Tp–e as a marker of ventricular electrical instability. Similarly, patients with in-hospital MACE had significantly higher baseline Tp–e (106 vs. 90 ms), higher post-fibrinolysis Tp–e (92 vs. 72 ms), and lower ΔTp–e (10 vs. 21 ms) than those without MACE (all p<0.001). Baseline Tp–e >100 ms and ΔTp–e <15 ms were associated with an 8.35-fold and 6.56-fold increased risk of MACE, respectively. These observations are in agreement with the findings of Gupta et al15, Panikkath et al23, and Wu et al.24

 

Limitations

This was a single-center study with a relatively small sample size, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. The cross-sectional design did not permit long-term prognostic assessment. Reperfusion was evaluated using surrogate ECG markers rather than angiographic confirmation, and manual Tp–e interval measurement may have introduced observer bias. In addition, potential confounding factors such as infarct size, collateral circulation, and treatment variability were not fully controlled.

 

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrates that the Tp–e interval is a simple, non-invasive, and reliable ECG marker for assessing myocardial reperfusion in STEMI patients undergoing fibrinolytic therapy. A greater reduction in the Tp–e interval was associated with successful reperfusion and favorable clinical outcomes, while prolonged baseline Tp–e and inadequate post-fibrinolysis reduction predicted ventricular arrhythmias and in-hospital major adverse cardiac events. As Tp–e interval can be readily measured from a standard 12-lead ECG, it represents a practical, cost-effective, and widely accessible bedside tool for early risk stratification and assessment of reperfusion, particularly in resource-limited settings.

 

Conflict of Interest: No conflict of interest.

REFERENCES

1.      World Health Organization. Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021 [cited 2026 Jul 21]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/cardiovascular-diseases-(cvds)

2.      Roth GA, Mensah GA, Johnson CO, Addolorato G, Ammirati E, Baddour LM, et al. Global burden of cardiovascular diseases and risk factors, 1990–2019: update from the GBD 2019 study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76(25):2982–3021.

3.      Ibanez B, James S, Agewall S, Antunes MJ, Bucciarelli-Ducci C, Bueno H, Caforio ALP, et al. 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(2):119–177.

4.      De Luca G, Suryapranata H, Ottervanger JP, Antman EM. Time delay to treatment and mortality in primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: every minute of delay counts. Circulation. 2004;109(10):1223–1225.

5.      Gupta R, Mohan I, Narula J. Trends in coronary heart disease epidemiology in India. Ann Glob Health. 2016;82(2):307–315.

6.      Schröder R. Prognostic impact of early ST-segment resolution in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2004;110(21):e506–e510.

7.      Gorgels AP, Vos MA, Mulleneers R, de Zwaan C, Bar FW, Wellens HJ. Value of the electrocardiogram in diagnosing reperfusion in acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1992;69(8):690–695.

8.      Antzelevitch C. Transmural dispersion of repolarization and arrhythmogenicity. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 1999;10(3):479–483.

9.      Yan GX, Antzelevitch C. Cellular basis for the electrocardiographic J wave. Circulation. 1996;93(2):372–379.

10.   Libby P. Mechanisms of acute coronary syndromes and their implications for therapy. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(21):2004–2013.

11.   Opthof T, Coronel R, Janse MJ. The role of transmural dispersion of repolarization in arrhythmogenesis. Cardiovasc Res. 2007;73(3):409–418.

12.   Birnbaum Y, Drew BJ. The electrocardiogram in ST elevation myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2003;107(5): e43–e45.

13.   Zareba W, Moss AJ. QT interval and arrhythmia risk. Cardiol J. 2007;14(6):525–533.

14.   Dal E, Eraybar S. Prognostic significance of Tpe/QTc ratio in STEMI patients. Sci Rep. 2025; 15:11353.

15.   Gupta R, Joshi P, Mohan V, Reddy KS, Yusuf S. Epidemiology and causation of coronary heart disease and stroke in India. Heart. 2008;94:16–26.

16.   Xavier D, Pais P, Devereaux PJ, Xie C, Prabhakaran D, Reddy KS, et al. Treatment and outcomes of acute coronary syndromes in India (CREATE registry). Lancet. 2008;371:1435–1442.

17.   Joshi R, Chow CK, Raju PK, Raju R, Reddy KS, MacMahon S, et al. Fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular disease in rural India. Circulation. 2008;118:1990–1996.

18.   GUSTO Investigators. An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1993; 329:673–682.

19.   Yusuf S, Hawken S, Ôunpuu S, Dans T, Avezum A, Lanas F, et al. Effect of modifiable risk factors on myocardial infarction (INTERHEART study). Lancet. 2004; 364:937–952.

20.   Goyal A, Spertus JA, Gosch K, Venkitachalam L, Jones PG, Van den Berghe G, et al. Serum potassium levels and mortality in acute myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2012;307:157–164.

21.   Schwartz GG, Olsson AG, Ezekowitz MD, Ganz P, Oliver MF, Waters D, et al. Effects of atorvastatin on early recurrent ischemic events. JAMA. 2001; 285:1711–1718.

22.   Zhao X, Xie Z, Chu Y, Yang L, Xu W, Yang X. Tp–e interval changes in acute myocardial infarction. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol 2012;17:243–249.

23.   Panikkath R, Reinier K, Uy-Evanado A, Teodorescu C, Hattenhauer J, Mariani R, et al. Prolonged Tpeak–Tend interval on the resting ECG is associated with increased risk of sudden cardiac death. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2011;4(4):441–447.

24.   Wu KC, Zerhouni EA, Judd RM, Lugo-Olivieri CH, Barouch LA, Schulman SP, et al. Prognostic significance of microvascular obstruction. Circulation. 1998;97:765–772.

25.   Eldar M, Sievner Z, Goldbourt U, Rechavia E, Kaplinsky E, Behar S. Primary ventricular tachycardia in acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1992; 70:74–78.

26.   Goldberg RJ, Spencer FA, Gore JM, Lessard D, Yarzebski J. Thirty-year trends in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1977–1987.

Recommended Articles
Research Article
Thrombocytopenia: An independent poor prognostic marker in Traumatic Brain Injury patients
...
Published: 28/12/2025
Download PDF
Review Article
Clinical and laboratory predictors of mortality in acute aluminium phosphide poisoning: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Published: 27/05/2020
Download PDF
Review Article
Utilisation of NCD screening services at Health and Wellness Centres (Ayushman Arogya Mandirs) among adults aged 30 years and above in a rural block: a community-based cross-sectional study
Published: 27/04/2020
Download PDF
Research Article
Clinical Profile and Etiological Evaluation of Dysphagia in Patients Attending an ENT Outpatient Department of a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital
Published: 15/06/2020
Download PDF
Chat on WhatsApp
Copyright © EJCM Publisher. All Rights Reserved.