PFLPhysiological Fitness Landscape

Biomarkers · Cardiac & Hemodynamics

QRS Duration

Lower values go with lower risk of death. Not measured in our NHANES panel. The curve is drawn from the published study (source below).

QRS Duration and risk of death

Published curve higher than the NHANES fitNHANES fit higher

Risk of death relative to the curve's reference value, drawn from the published study (source below).

Published risk of death1.48×QRS duration >=110 ms vs <110 ms (95% CI 1.22–1.81) · Finnish middle-aged general population (mean age 44), ECGs recorded 1966-1972, n=10,899

What studies found when this marker was changed

They describe what happened in those study groups, not a recommendation. See all catalogued interventions.

Measured changes in QRS Duration, study by study

2 effects with a numeric size, each from one study arm: the dot is the reported change, the line its 95% interval where one was given. Green points move the marker the way lower risk of death lies; amber the other way. Study results in the groups studied, not predictions for a person.

Each row is one study: what was changed, the effect it reported on this marker, and the source.
TypeInterventionReported effectEvidenceSource
clinicalHis-bundle or left bundle branch area pacing instead of conventional biventricular pacing for cardiac resynchronization in heart failure with reduced ejection fractionPaced QRS duration 13.34 ms shorter (95% CI 2.36-24.32) with conduction system pacing than biventricular pacing; LVEF +2.06%meta-analysisFerreira Felix I, Collini M, Fonseca R, et al. Conduction system pacing versus…
clinicalLeft bundle branch pacing compared with biventricular pacing in the same patients during CRT implantation for heart failure with left bundle branch blockLBBP shortens QRS duration by a further 11 ms (95% CI 4-17) vs biventricular pacing, with greater QRS-area and dP/dtmax improvementRCTLiang Y, Wang J, Gong X, et al. Left Bundle Branch Pacing Versus Biventricular…