Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Accuracy of mobile 6-lead electrocardiogram device for assessment of QT interval: a prospective validation study.
Bergeman, A T; Pultoo, S N J; Winter, M M; Somsen, G A; Tulevski, I I; Wilde, A A M; Postema, P G; van der Werf, C.
Afiliação
  • Bergeman AT; Department of Clinical and Experimental Cardiology, Heart Centre, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, location Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Pultoo SNJ; Cardiology Centres of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Winter MM; Department of Clinical and Experimental Cardiology, Heart Centre, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, location Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Somsen GA; Department of Clinical and Experimental Cardiology, Heart Centre, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, location Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Tulevski II; Cardiology Centres of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Wilde AAM; Cardiology Centres of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Postema PG; Cardiology Centres of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • van der Werf C; Department of Clinical and Experimental Cardiology, Heart Centre, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, location Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Neth Heart J ; 31(9): 340-347, 2023 Sep.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36063313
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Ambulatory assessment of the heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTc) can be of diagnostic value, for example in patients on QTc-prolonging medication. Repeating sequential 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) to monitor the QTc is cumbersome, but mobile ECG (mECG) devices can potentially solve this problem. As the accuracy of single-lead mECG devices is reportedly variable, a multilead mECG device may be more accurate.

METHODS:

This prospective dual-centre study included outpatients visiting our cardiology clinics for any indication. Participants underwent an mECG recording using a smartphone-enabled 6­lead mECG device immediately before or immediately after a conventional 12-lead ECG recording. Multiple QTc values in both recordings were manually measured in leads I and II using the tangent method and subsequently compared.

RESULTS:

In total, 234 subjects were included (mean ± standard deviation (SD) age 57 ± 17 years; 58% males), of whom 133 (57%) had cardiac disease. QTc measurement in any lead was impossible due to artefacts in 16 mECGs (7%) and no 12-lead ECGs. Mean (± SD) QTc in lead II on the mECG and 12-lead ECG was 401 ± 30 and 406 ± 31 ms, respectively. Mean (± SD) absolute difference in QTc values between both modalities was 12 ± 9 ms (r = 0.856; p < 0.001). In 55% of the subjects, the absolute difference between QTc values was < 10 ms.

CONCLUSION:

A 6-lead mECG allows for QTc assessment with good accuracy and can be used safely in ambulatory QTc monitoring. This may improve patient satisfaction and reduce healthcare costs.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Neth Heart J Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Holanda

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Neth Heart J Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Holanda