Liver Stiffness, Not Fat Liver Content, Predicts the Length of QTc Interval in Patients with Chronic Liver Disease

Table 4

Predictors of QTc value. In (a), we show the results of the multivariable logistic regression analysis testing for potential predictors of QTc prolongation; in (b), the results of a multiple regression analysis built to predict the QTc value in the derivation cohort (after logarithmic transformation) are shown.

(a)

Variable	Odds ratio (95% CI)
Age	1.044 (1.004 – 1.086)	0.031
Gender	0.828 (0.333 – 2.061)	0.685
HR	1.060 (1.017 – 1.104)	0.005
CR drugs	0.845 (0.299 –2.386)	0.751
LS	1.078 (1.022 – 1.136)	0.006
CAP	1.005 (0.997 – 1.012)	0.236

(b)

Variable	Coefficient (95% CI)
Age	0.001 (0.000 – 0.002)	<0.001
Gender	-0.023 (-0.040 – -0.007)	0.004
HR	0.002 (0.001 – 0.003)	<0.001
CR drugs	0.010 (-0.008 – 0.003)	0.250
LS	0.003 (0.001 – 0.004)	0.001
CAP	0.000 (0.000 – 0.000)	0.433
Constant	5.786 (5.718 – 5.855)	<0.001

Abbreviations: HR: heart rate; CR: conditional risk; LS: liver stiffness; CAP: controlled attenuation parameter. The asterisk () indicate variables that were entered into the model as categorical variables.