+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Single-Lead Electrocardiographic Variables in the Detection of Prior Myocardial Infarction with Respect to Q-Wave Status and Infarct Age

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Objectives: Conventionally, the detection of prior myocardial infarction (MI) is based on QRS abnormalities, which may ignore non-Q-wave MI (NQMI). We aimed at finding automatically applicable quantitative ECG variables for diagnosing prior MI. Methods: Body surface potential mapping (BSPM) was registered and automatically analyzed in 144 patients with prior MI and in 75 healthy controls. The MI was defined according to its age as recent or old, and Q-wave status as Q-wave MI (QMI) or NQMI. Results: The QRSSTT integral, the STT integral and the T-wave apex amplitude applied in single, selected leads were found to be the optimal parameters in the detection of prior MI. The areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUC) were 89% for each, and detection was equal in old and recent MI (AUCs from 87 to 90%), and in QMI and NQMI (AUCs from 88 to 90%). Conclusions: The quantitative, automatically applicable single-lead variables comprising ventricular repolarization was effective in detecting prior MI, irrespective of the time elapsed from MI or the Q-wave status. These variables could be suitable for population studies and health screening purposes and are applicable to automatic ECG diagnostics of prior MI.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Incidence of recognized and unrecognized myocardial infarction in men and women aged 55 and older: the Rotterdam Study.

          Contemporary data on the incidence of unrecognized myocardial infarction (MI) among subjects aged 55 and older are limited. We studied the incidence of recognized and unrecognized MI in the Rotterdam Study, a population-based cohort of men and women aged 55 and older. The baseline examination was performed during 1990-93, with follow-up examinations during 1994-95, and 1997-2000. Baseline and follow-up 12-lead ECGs were analysed by the Modular ECG Analysis System. The 5148 participants who had no evidence of prevalent infarction were the subjects for analysis. Incident recognized infarction was defined as the occurrence of a fatal or non-fatal event coded as I21 according to the International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition. A repeat ECG was available in 4187 subjects. An unrecognized infarction was considered to have occurred if there was electrocardiographic evidence in the absence of a clinically recognized event. During a median follow-up of 6.4 years, 141 incident recognized infarctions occurred and the incidence rate of this event was 5.0 per 1000 person years. The incidence was higher in men (8.4) than in women (3.1). The incidence rate of unrecognized infarction was 3.8 per 1000 person years. Men (4.2) and women (3.6) had approximately similar incidence. Hence, the proportion of unrecognized infarction was lower in men (33%) than in women (54%). This difference in proportion of unrecognized infarctions was independent of age. A high proportion of incident MIs remains clinically unrecognized. As a history of MI is associated with an increased risk of repeat cardiovascular complications, our data suggest a need for periodical electrocardiographic screening to recognize (prevalent) infarctions and to install effective preventive treatment in those aged 55 and older.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The pathologic basis of Q-wave and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction: a cardiovascular magnetic resonance study.

            The purpose of this study was to determine the pathologic basis of Q-wave (QW) and non-Q-wave (NQW) myocardial infarction (MI). The QW/NQW distinction remains in wide clinical use but the meaning of the difference remains controversial. We hypothesized that measurement of total MI size and transmural extent by late gadolinium enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) would identify the pathologic basis of QWs. A total of 100 consecutive patients with documented previous MI had electrocardiogram and CMR on the same day. Patients with acute MI within seven days were excluded. Left ventricular function and the size and transmural extent of MI were quantified in the three major arterial territories and correlated with the presence of QW. Subendocardial MI showed QW in 28%. Transmural MI showed NQW in 29%. Of all MIs, 48% were at some point transmural, and 99% of these were at some point non-transmural. As MI size and number of transmural segments increased, the probability of QW increased (anterior: total size chi-square = 53, p < 0.0001, transmural extent chi-square = 36, p < 0.0001; inferior: total size chi-square = 16, p = 0.001, transmural extent chi-square = 10, p = 0.001). These findings did not hold for lateral MI. In a multivariate model, the transmural extent of MI was not an independent predictor of QW when total size of MI was removed. The QW/NQW classification was a good test for size of MI (area under receiver operating characteristic curve: anterior 0.90, inferior 0.77). The QW/NQW distinction is useful, but it is determined by the total size rather than transmural extent of underlying MI.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Interpolation on a triangulated 3D surface


                Author and article information

                S. Karger AG
                March 2008
                17 September 2007
                : 109
                : 4
                : 222-229
                aDivision of Cardiology and bBioMag Laboratory, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, and cLaboratory of Biomedical Engineering, Helsinki University of Technology, Espoo, Finland
                107784 Cardiology 2008;109:222–229
                © 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 5, Tables: 3, References: 36, Pages: 8
                Original Research


                Comment on this article