Key result
Vectorcardiogram correlated more closely with left ventricular mass (R=0.75) and volume (R=0.80) than electrocardiogram (R=0.71) (P<0.01), but offered no large practical advantage.
Why the study?
Does the vectorcardiogram improve the prediction of left ventricular size compared to the electrocardiogram in patients?
Population
107 patients undergoing angiocardiography for left ventricular mass and volume determination
Comparison
Vectorcardiographic spatial magnitude measurements vs Precordial QRS voltage measurements
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
Vectorcardiogram offers only marginal gains over ECG for LV assessment; does not support clinical adoption and leaves open need for prospective validation.
Observational (n=107)
Does the vectorcardiogram improve the prediction of left ventricular size compared to the electrocardiogram in patients?
p-value: p=<0.01
Although the vectorcardiogram has a statistically significant but marginally better correlation with left ventricular mass and volume than the electrocardiogram, it does not offer a large practical advantage for predicting left ventricular size.
Vine et al. (1971) conducted an observational in Left ventricular enlargement (n=107). Vectorcardiogram vs. Electrocardiogram was evaluated on Correlation with angiocardiographically determined left ventricular mass and volume (p=<0.01). Vectorcardiogram correlated more closely with left ventricular mass (R=0.75) and volume (R=0.80) than electrocardiogram (R=0.71) (P<0.01), but offered no large practical advantage.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: