Literature DB >> 21353236

Diagnostic utility of the spatial versus individual planar QRS-T angles in cardiac disease detection.

Ryanne A Brown1, Todd T Schlegel.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: We compared the diagnostic utility of various planar QRS-T angles to that of the spatial QRS-T angle in detecting various cardiac diseases.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electrocardiographic (ECG) and derived vectorcardiographic (VCG) data were analyzed from 370 patients with imaging-proven cardiac disease (coronary artery disease, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, or left ventricular systolic dysfunction) and 210 apparently healthy controls. The areas under the curve (AUC) of the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) for distinguishing cardiac health from disease for each disease condition were statistically compared for the spatial mean QRS-T angle versus the ECG-derived frontal and VCG-derived frontal, left sagittal and horizontal planar QRS-T angles.
RESULTS: The AUC ROC of the spatial mean QRS-T angle, which ranged from 0.801 ± 0.035 to 0.987 ± 0.007 depending on the specific comparison, was always significantly greater than that of the ECG frontal planar QRS-T angle (range from 0.680 ± 0.043 to 0.796 ± 0.045) and usually significantly greater than that of all other QRS-T angles for the diseases studied. DISCUSSION: The spatial mean QRS-T angle is statistically significantly more diagnostically powerful than the ECG-derived frontal planar QRS-T angle and also generally more diagnostically powerful than all VCG-derived planar QRS-T angles in detecting cardiac disease. The ECG frontal planar QRS-T angle should not be considered an adequate diagnostic substitute for the spatial QRS-T angle. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21353236     DOI: 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2011.01.001

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


  6 in total

1.  Relations between QRS|T angle, cardiac risk factors, and mortality in the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III).

Authors:  William Whang; Daichi Shimbo; Emily B Levitan; Jonathan D Newman; Pentti M Rautaharju; Karina W Davidson; Paul Muntner
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2012-01-03       Impact factor: 2.778

2.  The Value of Frontal Planar QRS-T Angle in Patients without Angiographically Apparent Atherosclerosis.

Authors:  Mutlu Gungor; Murat Celik; Emre Yalcinkaya; Alper Tolga Polat; Uygar Cagdas Yuksel; Erkan Yildirim; Serdar Firtina; Baris Bugan; Ali Can Ozer
Journal:  Med Princ Pract       Date:  2016-11-08       Impact factor: 1.927

Review 3.  QRS-T angle: a review.

Authors:  Andrew Oehler; Trevor Feldman; Charles A Henrikson; Larisa G Tereshchenko
Journal:  Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol       Date:  2014-09-09       Impact factor: 1.468

4.  Value of the Qrs-T angle in predicting the induction of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with Chagas disease.

Authors:  Hugo Bizetto Zampa; Dalmo A R Moreira; Carlos Alberto Brandão Ferreira Filho; Charles Rios Souza; Camila Caldas Menezes; Henrique Seichii Hirata; Luciana Vidal Armaganijan
Journal:  Arq Bras Cardiol       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 2.000

5.  ECG-derived spatial QRS-T angle is associated with ICD implantation, mortality and heart failure admissions in patients with LV systolic dysfunction.

Authors:  Sarah Gleeson; Yi-Wen Liao; Clementina Dugo; Andrew Cave; Lifeng Zhou; Zina Ayar; Jonathan Christiansen; Tony Scott; Liane Dawson; Andrew Gavin; Todd T Schlegel; Patrick Gladding
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  ECG Localization Method Based on Volume Conductor Model and Kalman Filtering.

Authors:  Yuki Nakano; Essam A Rashed; Tatsuhito Nakane; Ilkka Laakso; Akimasa Hirata
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 3.576

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.