INTRODUCTION: Outcome of cardiac resynchronization therapy is severely worsened by myocardial scar at the left ventricular (LV) pacing site. We aimed to describe the diagnostic performance of electrocardiographic (ECG) criteria based on the Selvester QRS scoring system, first in localizing myocardial scar and second in screening for any non-septal scar in patients with strictly defined LBBB. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 39 cardiomyopathy patients with LBBB, 17 with scar, 22 without scar, late gadolinium-enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance images (CMR-LGE) and 12-lead ECGs were analyzed for scar presence in 5 LV wall segments. The ECG criteria with the best diagnostic performance in detecting scar in each segment and in the four non-septal segments together were identified. Criteria for detecting non-septal scar had 75% (95% CI: 51%-90%) sensitivity, 95% (78%-99%) specificity, 92% (67%-99%) positive predictive value and 84% (65%-94%) negative predictive value. For each individual wall segment, 40%-60% sensitivities and 77%-100% specificities were found. CONCLUSIONS: The 12-lead ECG can convey information about scar presence and location in this population of cardiomyopathy patients with LBBB. ECG screening criteria for scar in potential CRT LV pacing sites were identified. Further exploration is required to determine the clinical utility of the 12-lead ECG in combination with other imaging modalities to screen for scar in potential LV pacing sites in CRT candidates. Published by Elsevier Inc.
INTRODUCTION: Outcome of cardiac resynchronization therapy is severely worsened by myocardial scar at the left ventricular (LV) pacing site. We aimed to describe the diagnostic performance of electrocardiographic (ECG) criteria based on the Selvester QRS scoring system, first in localizing myocardial scar and second in screening for any non-septal scar in patients with strictly defined LBBB. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 39 cardiomyopathypatients with LBBB, 17 with scar, 22 without scar, late gadolinium-enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance images (CMR-LGE) and 12-lead ECGs were analyzed for scar presence in 5 LV wall segments. The ECG criteria with the best diagnostic performance in detecting scar in each segment and in the four non-septal segments together were identified. Criteria for detecting non-septal scar had 75% (95% CI: 51%-90%) sensitivity, 95% (78%-99%) specificity, 92% (67%-99%) positive predictive value and 84% (65%-94%) negative predictive value. For each individual wall segment, 40%-60% sensitivities and 77%-100% specificities were found. CONCLUSIONS: The 12-lead ECG can convey information about scar presence and location in this population of cardiomyopathypatients with LBBB. ECG screening criteria for scar in potential CRT LV pacing sites were identified. Further exploration is required to determine the clinical utility of the 12-lead ECG in combination with other imaging modalities to screen for scar in potential LV pacing sites in CRT candidates. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Manuel D Cerqueira; Neil J Weissman; Vasken Dilsizian; Alice K Jacobs; Sanjiv Kaul; Warren K Laskey; Dudley J Pennell; John A Rumberger; Thomas Ryan; Mario S Verani Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-01-29 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Fakhar Z Khan; Mumohan S Virdee; Christopher R Palmer; Peter J Pugh; Denis O'Halloran; Maros Elsik; Philip A Read; David Begley; Simon P Fynn; David P Dutka Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-03-07 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Michael R Bristow; Leslie A Saxon; John Boehmer; Steven Krueger; David A Kass; Teresa De Marco; Peter Carson; Lorenzo DiCarlo; David DeMets; Bill G White; Dale W DeVries; Arthur M Feldman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-05-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Katherine C Wu; Gary Gerstenblith; Eliseo Guallar; Joseph E Marine; Darshan Dalal; Alan Cheng; Eduardo Marbán; João A C Lima; Gordon F Tomaselli; Robert G Weiss Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-01-20 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: R M Ward; R D White; R E Ideker; N B Hindman; D R Alonso; S P Bishop; C M Bloor; J T Fallon; G J Gottlieb; D B Hackel Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1984-03-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: S F Roark; R E Ideker; G S Wagner; D R Alonso; S P Bishop; C M Bloor; D A Bramlet; J E Edwards; J T Fallon; G J Gottlieb; D B Hackel; H R Phillips; K A Reimer; W J Rogers; W K Ruth; R M Savage; R D White; R H Selvester Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1983-02 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: R E Ideker; G S Wagner; W K Ruth; D R Alonso; S P Bishop; C M Bloor; J T Fallon; G J Gottlieb; D B Hackel; H R Phillips; K A Reimer; S F Roark; W J Rogers; R M Savage; R D White; R H Selvester Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1982-05 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: G S Wagner; C J Freye; S T Palmeri; S F Roark; N C Stack; R E Ideker; F E Harrell; R H Selvester Journal: Circulation Date: 1982-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Uzma Chaudhry; Pyotr G Platonov; Robert Jablonowski; Jean-Philippe Couderc; Henrik Engblom; Xiajuang Xia; Björn Wieslander; Brett D Atwater; David G Strauss; Jesper Van der Pals; Martin Ugander; Marcus Carlsson; Rasmus Borgquist Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Osman Can Yontar; Guney Erdogan; Mustafa Yenercag; Sefa Gul; Ugur Arslan; Ali Karagoz Journal: Acta Cardiol Sin Date: 2021-11 Impact factor: 2.672