Journal of Electrocardiology
Volume 42, Issue 2 , Pages 145-151, March 2009

EASI-Derived vs standard 12-lead electrocardiogram for Selvester QRS score estimations of chronic myocardial infarct size, using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging as gold standard

  • Annika E. Welinder, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Clinical Physiology, University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Department of Clinical Physiology, Lund University Hospital, SE-221 85 Lund, Sweden. Tel.: +46 46 17 33 07; fax: +46 46 15 17 69.
  • ,
  • Galen S. Wagner, MD

      Affiliations

    • Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
  • ,
  • B. Milan Horáček, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Faculty of Medicine of Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
  • ,
  • Thomas N. Martin, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Cardiology, Western Infirmary, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
  • ,
  • Charles Maynard, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
  • ,
  • Olle Pahlm, MD, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Clinical Physiology, University Hospital, Lund, Sweden

Received 4 September 2008 published online 19 December 2008.

Abstract 

Background

The size of myocardial infarction (MI) is of significance for the prognosis. Selvester scores might be valuable for this estimation.

Objective

To compare the differences in Selvester scores for chronic MI provided from standard and EASI-derived 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) and to compare these scores to the MI size measured by delayed-enhancement magnetic resonance imaging (DE-MRI).

Methods

Thirty-seven patients were studied. In connection with their DE-MRI scan follow-up after chest pain, body surface potential mapping was performed. Standard and EASI 12-lead ECGs were constructed from the maps. Two investigators manually performed the measurements required for scoring with the Selvester system using a quad-plot format of the ECGs. One of the investigators repeated this once for the standard leads.

Results

The differences between the 2 ECG estimations of MRI-measured MI size were not statistically significant. Neither the association nor the agreement between MRI and EASI-lead measurements or between MRI and standard-lead measurements were very strong.

Conclusions

The differences between ECG and MRI measurements of MI size indicate that both methods may need improvement.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 This study was supported in part by the Region of Scania, Kristianstad, Sweden.

PII: S0022-0736(08)00441-X

doi:10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2008.10.010

Journal of Electrocardiology
Volume 42, Issue 2 , Pages 145-151, March 2009