Why the study?
Vectorcardiography is useful for automated diagnosis of heart diseases but not commonly used clinically, prompting the comparison of methods to derive VCG leads from 12-lead ECG.
Which transformation method is most accurate for deriving VCG leads from 12-lead ECG in physiological and myocardial infarction records?
Which transformation method is most accurate for deriving VCG leads from 12-lead ECG in physiological and myocardial infarction records?
Kors regression is generally the most accurate method for deriving VCG leads from 12-lead ECGs, particularly in pathological records, though QLSV may be superior for the Z lead in physiological records.
Vectorcardiography (VCG) as an alternative form of 12-lead ECG is another method of measuring the electrical activity of the heart. The use of vectorcardiography in clinical practice is not common, but VCG leads can be derived from 12-lead ECG. VCG has proven to be a useful and more accurate tool for diagnosing various heart diseases within automated detection. This paper presents the application of four transformation methods namely: Kors regression, IDT, QLSV and Quasi-Orthogonal transformation to obtain a derived VCG. A total of 20 physiological and 20 records with the diagnosis of myocardial infarction were used. For physiological records, the Kors regression method achieved the best results in leads X and Y with relative deviation <1%, correlation and percentage similarity >99%. In lead Z, the QLSV method achieved the most accurate results with relative deviation <1%, correlation >98% and percentage similarity >99%. For pathological records, the most accurate method in all leads was Kors regression with relative deviation <2.2%, correlation >93% and percentage similarity >97%. From these results, there is the possibility of creating a new transformation method from the existing ones in order to obtain a more accurate transformation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vondrak et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: