Loading…

Simultaneous comparison of 3 derived 12-lead electrocardiograms with standard electrocardiogram at rest and during percutaneous coronary occlusion

Abstract Aim The aim of the study was to simultaneously test the EASI lead system and two other derived ECG methods against the standard 12-lead ECG during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods During 44 percutaneous coronary interventions, a simultaneously recorded 12-lead and EASI ECG...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of electrocardiology 2008-05, Vol.41 (3), p.230-237
Main Authors: Nelwan, Stefan P., PhD, Kors, Jan A., PhD, Crater, Suzanne W., MSN, Meij, Simon H., MSc, van Dam, Teus B., RN, Simoons, Maarten L., MD, PhD, Krucoff, Mitchell W., MD
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Aim The aim of the study was to simultaneously test the EASI lead system and two other derived ECG methods against the standard 12-lead ECG during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods During 44 percutaneous coronary interventions, a simultaneously recorded 12-lead and EASI ECG were marked at the start of the PCI (baseline) and at known ischemia caused by balloon inflation (peak). ST deviations were measured 60 ms after the J point at baseline and peak in all leads and were summated (SUMST) to assess overall changes. For regional changes, the lead with the highest ST deviation (PEAKST) was marked. For each patient, derived 12-lead ECGs were computed from the EASI leads and a lead subset using patient-specific coefficients (PS) and coefficients based on a patient population (GEN). Absolute differences were computed between each derived and routine ECG for SUMST and PEAKST. Results SUMST was at baseline 567 μ V (range: 150-1707) and increased at peak to 871 μ V (range: 350-2101). SUMST difference at peak was for EASI: 163 μ V (CI: 90-236, P
ISSN:0022-0736
1532-8430
DOI:10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2008.01.011