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

Stefan Nelwan, Jan Kors, SW Crater, SH Meij, TB van Dam, Maarten Simoons, MW Kmcoff

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

16 Citations (Scopus)

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 mu V (range: 150-1707) and increased at peak to 871 mu V (range: 350-2101). SUMST difference at peak was for EASI: 163 mu V (CI: 90-236, P <.001), GEN: 46 mu V (CI: 2-91, P =.40), and PS: 16 mu V (CI: 3-30, P =.15). PEAKST difference at peak was for EASI: 49 mu V (CI: 19-220, P =.02), GEN: 48 mu V (CI: -43-154, P =.26), and PS: 20 mu V (CI: -51-32, P= .65). Conclusion: Simultaneous direct comparison of three derived ECG methods shows overall and regional differences in accuracy across PS, GEN, and EASI. Median SUMST and PEAKST differences for PS are lower than for GEN and EASI, and show a more accurate reconstruction. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Original languageUndefined/Unknown
Pages (from-to)230-237
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Electrocardiology
Volume41
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2008

Research programs

  • EMC NIHES-03-77-01

Cite this