Literature DB >> 10688301

Accuracy of the EASI 12-lead electrocardiogram compared to the standard 12-lead electrocardiogram for diagnosing multiple cardiac abnormalities.

B J Drew1, M M Pelter, S F Wung, M G Adams, C Taylor, G T Evans, E Foster.   

Abstract

This study was performed to compare a derived 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) using a simple 5-electrode lead configuration (EASI 12-lead) with the standard ECG for multiple cardiac diagnoses. Accurate diagnosis of arrhythmias and ischemia often require analysis of multiple (ideally, 12) ECG leads; however, continuous 12-lead monitoring is impractical in hospital settings. EASI and standard ECGs were compared in 540 patients, 426 of whom also had continuous 12-lead ST segment monitoring with both lead methods. Independent standards relative to a correct diagnosis were used whenever possible, for example, echocardiographic data for chamber enlargement-hypertrophy, and troponin levels for acute infarction. Percent agreement between the 2 methods were: cardiac rhythm, 100%; chamber enlargement-hypertrophy, 84%-99%; right and left bundle branch block, 95% and 97%, respectively; left anterior and posterior fascicular block, 97% and 99%, respectively; prior anterior and inferior infarction, 95% and 92%, respectively. There was very little variation between the 2 lead methods in cardiac interval measurements; however, there was more variation in P, QRS, and T-wave axes. Of the 426 patients with ST monitoring, 138 patients had a total of 238 ST events (26, acute infarction; 62, angioplasty-induced ischemia; 150, spontaneous transient ischemia). There was 100% agreement between the 2 methods for acute infarction, 95% agreement for angioplasty-induced ischemia, and 89% agreement for transient ischemia. EASI and standard 12-lead ECGs are comparable for multiple cardiac diagnoses; however, serial ECG changes (eg, T-wave changes) should be assessed using one consistent 12-lead method.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10688301     DOI: 10.1016/s0022-0736(99)90033-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Electrocardiol        ISSN: 0022-0736            Impact factor:   1.438


  4 in total

Review 1.  Technical mistakes during the acquisition of the electrocardiogram.

Authors:  Javier García-Niebla; Pablo Llontop-García; Juan Ignacio Valle-Racero; Guillem Serra-Autonell; Velislav N Batchvarov; Antonio Bayés de Luna
Journal:  Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.468

Review 2.  Cardiac Monitoring in the Emergency Department.

Authors:  Jessica K Zègre-Hemsey; J Lee Garvey; Mary G Carey
Journal:  Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am       Date:  2016-07-02       Impact factor: 1.326

3.  Electrode positions, transformation coordinates for ECG reconstruction from S-ICD vectors.

Authors:  David G Wilson; Peter L Cronbach; D Panfilo; Saul E Greenhut; Berthold P Stegemann; John M Morgan
Journal:  Data Brief       Date:  2017-02-22

4.  Feasibility of CardioSecur®, a Mobile 4-Electrode/22-Lead ECG Device, in the Prehospital Emergency Setting.

Authors:  Sebastian Spaich; Hanna Kern; Thomas A Zelniker; Jan Stiepak; Michael Gabel; Erik Popp; Hugo A Katus; Michael R Preusch
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2020-10-09
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.