| Literature DB >> 21358612 |
Malgorzata Fereniec1, Gunter Stix, Michal Kania, Tomasz Mroczka, Dariusz Janusek, Roman Maniewski.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The effective screening of myocardial infarction (MI) patients threatened by ventricular tachycardia (VT) is an important issue in clinical practice, especially in the process of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy recommendation. This study proposes new parameters describing depolarization and repolarization inhomogeneity in high resolution body surface potential maps (HR BSPM) to identify MI patients threatened by VT. MATERIAL/Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21358612 PMCID: PMC3524725 DOI: 10.12659/msm.881436
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Basic data of studied groups.
| Study group description | Total number | Age (mean ±SD) [Years] | LVEF (mean ±SD) [%] |
|---|---|---|---|
| MI patients with VT | 26 | 65±12 | 38±11 |
| MI patients without VT | 14 | 62±11 | 44±15 |
| Healthy volunteers | 25 | 49±15 | N/A |
LVEF – left ventricular ejection fraction; MI – myocardial infarction; VT – ventricular tachycardia; N/A – not available.
Figure 1Lead arrangement around the torso for high resolution body surface potential mapping. Standard ECG leads are marked by squares.
Figure 2ECG characteristic time instances detected on RMS signal obtained from three components S1, S2, S3 of singular value decomposition algorithm.
Values of examined parameters for studied groups (2nd, 4th, 6th columns) and statistical differences (p-value) obtained by Mann-Whitney test between MI patients with and without VT (3rd column), as well as between non VT MI patients group and control group (5th column).
| Parameter | MI-VT patients (mean ±SD) | Statistical differences MI-VT | MI–nonVT patients (mean ±SD) | Statistical differences MI-nonVT | Control group (mean ±SD) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| STT_QRST_CORR | 0.35±0.54 | 0.05 | 0.63±0.47 | 0.004 | 0.91±0.09 |
| STT_DI | 1.81±0.61 | 0.01 | 1.32±0.41 | 0.0001 | 0.80±0.27 |
| TSI_DI | 2.53±1.15 | 0.03 | 1.71±1.07 | 0.003 | 0.77±0.27 |
| QRS INT [ms] | 137±30 | 0.03 | 120±13 | 0.005 | 107±13 |
| QT INT [ms] | 482±54 | 0.02 | 441±36 | 0.005 | 405±31 |
| QT INT DISP [ms] | 78±32 | ns (0.68) | 77±25 | ns (0.16) | 65±25 |
| Tpeak–Tend INT [ms] | 123±29 | ns (0.09) | 109±17 | ns (0.54) | 105±16 |
| TCRT | −0.37±0.50 | ns (0.06) | 0.03±0.65 | ns (0.48) | 0.23±0.44 |
| NDC [%] | 9.7±9.8 | ns (0.33) | 13±15 | 0.02 | 6±4 |
NDC – non dipolar content of QRST integral maps, STT_DI – departure index of absolute value of STT integral map, STT_QRST_CORR – correlation coefficient between STT and QRST integral maps, TCRT – total cosine between QRS complex and T wave, Tpeak-Tend INT – T wave peak to T wave end interval, TSI_DI – departure index of absolute value of T-wave shape index, QRS INT – QRS interval, QT INT – QT interval, QT INT DISP – dispersion of QT interval, SD – standard deviation, and ns – not significant.
Figure 3Mean ±SD values and 25th, 50th (median) and 75th percentiles of proposed new parameters: STT_DI, TSI_DI and STT_QRST_CORR.
Values of sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic criteria for selected parameters.
| Parameter | Sensitivity | Specificity | Criterion |
|---|---|---|---|
| STT_QRST_CORR | 0.73 | 0.71 | 0.7 |
| STT_DI | 0.77 | 0.64 | 1.4 |
| TSI_DI | 0.69 | 0.79 | 2.1 |
| QRS INT [ms] | 0.73 | 0.71 | 122 |
| QT INT [ms] | 0.73 | 0.71 | 459 |
Abbreviations as in Table 2.
Figure 4Sensitivity ● and specificity ○ of proposed parameters: (A) STT_QRST CORR, (B) STT_DI, (C) TSI_DI.
Best values of sensitivity of parameters in MI-VT patients who experienced ICD intervention during follow up study.
| Parameter | ICD Follow up (14 pts) |
|---|---|
| STT_DI | 0.71 |
| STT-QRST CORR | 0.79 |
| TCRT | 0.71 |
| QRS INT | 0.64 |
| QT INT | 0.64 |
Abbreviations as in Table 2.