Skip Navigation

European Heart Journal 1996 17(6):911-916;
Copyright © 1996 by the European Society of Cardiology.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Christiansen, E. H.
Right arrow Articles by Pedersen, A. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Christiansen, E. H.
Right arrow Articles by Pedersen, A. K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1996 The European Society of Cardiology

Noise in the signal-averaged electrocardiogram and accuracy for identification of patients with sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia after myocardial infarction

E. H. Christiansen, L. Frost, H. MØlgaar, T. T. Nielsen and A. K. Pedersen

Department of cardiology, Skejby Sygehus, University Hospital Aarhus, Denmark

Received 18 September 1995; accepted 25 October 1995.

Correspondence: Evald Høj Christiansen, Department of Cardiology, Skejby Sygehus, University Hospital, KD-8200 Aarhus N, Denmark

Abstract

Late potentials are detected at various noise levels in clinical studies. The aim of this study was, in a case-control design, to assess the effect of residual noise level on the identification of patients with sustained monomorphic ventncular tachycardia after myocardial infarction. Electrocardiograms from 16 patients with prior myocardial infarction and documented sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia and 41 patients with prior myocardial infarction and without ventncular tachycardia, were analysed by two signal averaging procedures to noise level 0·2 and 0·4 µV Standard time domain parameters were measured. Two definitions of late potential were analysed: (1) if any two of the following criteria were present (signal-averaged QRS duration >120 ms, late potential duration >40 ms, and root-mean-square voltage of the terminal 40 ms of the filtered QRS <25µV); or (2) if the signal-averaged QRS duration ≥120 ms. Overall the signal-averaged electrocardiogram performed better at noise level 0·4µV compared to noise level 0·2µV with respect to identification of patients with or without ventricular tachycardia after myocordial infarction. Reducing noise level from 0·4 to 0·2 µV increased the sensitivity, but the consequence was a substantial decrease in specificity. Our data indicate that when a high sensitivity is the goal, the definition based only on signal-averaged QRS duration ≥120 ms should be applied; sensitivity was 88% and specificity 59% at noise level 0·4 µV. If a high specificity is the goal, the definition should be based on the definition with two abnormal parameters; sensitivity was 69% and specificity 68% at noise level 0·4µV.

Key Words: Signal averaging • late potentials • ventricular tachyarrhythmia • noise reduction • electrocardiography


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.