Kazi T Haq1, Katherine J Lutz1, Kyle K Peters1, Natalie E Craig1, Evan Mitchell1, Anish K Desai1, Nathan W L Stencel1, Elsayed Z Soliman2, João A C Lima3, Larisa G Tereshchenko4. 1. Knight Cardiovascular Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States of America. 2. Epidemiological Cardiology Research Center, Division of Public Health Sciences and Department of Medicine, Cardiology Section, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston Salem, NC, United States of America. 3. Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States of America. 4. Knight Cardiovascular Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States of America; Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States of America. Electronic address: tereshch@ohsu.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Vectorcardiographic (VCG) global electrical heterogeneity (GEH) metrics showed clinical usefulness. We aimed to assess the reproducibility of GEH metrics. METHODS: GEH was measured on two 10-s 12‑lead ECGs recorded on the same day in 4316 participants of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (age 69.4 ± 9.4 y; 2317(54%) female, 1728 (40%) white, 1138(26%) African-American, 519(12%) Asian-American, 931(22%) Hispanic-American). GEH was measured on a median beat, comprised of the normal sinus (N), atrial fibrillation/flutter (S), and ventricular-paced (VP) beats. Spatial ventricular gradient's (SVG's) scalar was measured as sum absolute QRST integral (SAIQRST) and vector magnitude QT integral (VMQTi). RESULTS: Two N ECGs with heart rate (HR) bias of -0.64 (95% limits of agreement [LOA] -5.68 to 5.21) showed spatial area QRS-T angle (aQRST) bias of -0.12 (95%LOA -14.8 to 14.5). Two S ECGs with HR bias of 0.20 (95%LOA -15.8 to 16.2) showed aQRST bias of 1.37 (95%LOA -33.2 to 35.9). Two VP ECGs with HR bias of 0.25 (95%LOA -3.0 to 3.5) showed aQRST bias of -1.03 (95%LOA -11.9 to 9.9). After excluding premature atrial or ventricular beat and two additional beats (before and after extrasystole), the number of cardiac beats included in a median beat did not affect the GEH reproducibility. Mean-centered log-transformed values of SAIQRST and VMQTi demonstrated perfect agreement (Bias 0; 95%LOA -0.092 to 0.092). CONCLUSION: GEH measurements on N, S, and VP median beats are reproducible. SVG's scalar can be measured as either SAIQRST or VMQTi. SIGNIFICANCE: Satisfactory reproducibility of GEH metrics supports their implementation.
OBJECTIVE: Vectorcardiographic (VCG) global electrical heterogeneity (GEH) metrics showed clinical usefulness. We aimed to assess the reproducibility of GEH metrics. METHODS: GEH was measured on two 10-s 12‑lead ECGs recorded on the same day in 4316 participants of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (age 69.4 ± 9.4 y; 2317(54%) female, 1728 (40%) white, 1138(26%) African-American, 519(12%) Asian-American, 931(22%) Hispanic-American). GEH was measured on a median beat, comprised of the normal sinus (N), atrial fibrillation/flutter (S), and ventricular-paced (VP) beats. Spatial ventricular gradient's (SVG's) scalar was measured as sum absolute QRST integral (SAIQRST) and vector magnitude QT integral (VMQTi). RESULTS: Two N ECGs with heart rate (HR) bias of -0.64 (95% limits of agreement [LOA] -5.68 to 5.21) showed spatial area QRS-T angle (aQRST) bias of -0.12 (95%LOA -14.8 to 14.5). Two S ECGs with HR bias of 0.20 (95%LOA -15.8 to 16.2) showed aQRST bias of 1.37 (95%LOA -33.2 to 35.9). Two VP ECGs with HR bias of 0.25 (95%LOA -3.0 to 3.5) showed aQRST bias of -1.03 (95%LOA -11.9 to 9.9). After excluding premature atrial or ventricular beat and two additional beats (before and after extrasystole), the number of cardiac beats included in a median beat did not affect the GEH reproducibility. Mean-centered log-transformed values of SAIQRST and VMQTi demonstrated perfect agreement (Bias 0; 95%LOA -0.092 to 0.092). CONCLUSION: GEH measurements on N, S, and VP median beats are reproducible. SVG's scalar can be measured as either SAIQRST or VMQTi. SIGNIFICANCE: Satisfactory reproducibility of GEH metrics supports their implementation.
Authors: Larisa G Tereshchenko; Alan Cheng; Jason Park; Nicholas Wold; Timothy E Meyer; Michael R Gold; Suneet Mittal; Jagmeet Singh; Kenneth M Stein; Kenneth A Ellenbogen Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2015-08-10 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Jason A Thomas; Erick A Perez-Alday; Allison Junell; Kelley Newton; Christopher Hamilton; Yin Li-Pershing; David German; Aron Bender; Larisa G Tereshchenko Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2018-11-07 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Larisa G Tereshchenko; Nona Sotoodehnia; Colleen M Sitlani; Foram N Ashar; Muammar Kabir; Mary L Biggs; Michael P Morley; Jonathan W Waks; Elsayed Z Soliman; Alfred E Buxton; Tor Biering-Sørensen; Scott D Solomon; Wendy S Post; Thomas P Cappola; David S Siscovick; Dan E Arking Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2018-04-05 Impact factor: 6.106
Authors: William J Young; Stefan van Duijvenboden; Julia Ramírez; Aled Jones; Andrew Tinker; Patricia B Munroe; Pier D Lambiase; Michele Orini Journal: Biomed Signal Process Control Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 3.880
Authors: Stacey J Howell; David German; Aron Bender; Francis Phan; Srini V Mukundan; Erick A Perez-Alday; Nichole M Rogovoy; Kazi T Haq; Katherine Yang; Ashley Wirth; Kelly Jensen; Larisa G Tereshchenko Journal: Cardiovasc Digit Health J Date: 2020-10-22
Authors: Julian D Fortune; Natalie E Coppa; Kazi T Haq; Hetal Patel; Larisa G Tereshchenko Journal: Comput Methods Programs Biomed Date: 2022-05-14 Impact factor: 7.027
Authors: Kazi T Haq; Blake L Cooper; Fiona Berk; Anysja Roberts; Luther M Swift; Nikki Gillum Posnack Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2022-06-02 Impact factor: 4.755