Why the study?
Does an automated computer-based system accurately interpret arrhythmias and ST segment abnormalities during exercise radionuclide ventriculography compared to cardiologist evaluation?
Does an automated computer-based system accurately interpret arrhythmias and ST segment abnormalities during exercise radionuclide ventriculography compared to cardiologist evaluation?
An automated ECG analysis system integrated with a gamma camera provides highly accurate beat-by-beat arrhythmia and ST segment interpretation during exercise testing.
May support automated ECG analysis in exercise ventriculography; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
A computer-based system for interpretation of the electrocardiogram (ECG) in the diagnosis of arrhythmia and ST segment abnormality in an exercise system is presented. The system was designed for inclusion in a gamma camera so that ECG diagnosis could be combined with the diagnostic capability of radionuclide ventriculography. Digitized data are analyzed in a beat-by-beat mode and a contextual diagnosis of underlying rhythm is provided. Each beat is assigned a beat code based on a combination of waveform analysis and RR interval measurement. The waveform analysis employs a new correlation coefficient formula which corrects for baseline wander. Selective signal averaging, in which only normal beats are included, is done for an improved signal-to-noise ratio prior to ST segment analysis. Template generation, R wave detection, QRS window size, baseline correction, and continuous updating of heart rate have all been automated. ST level and slope measurements are computed on signal-averaged data. Arrhythmia analysis of 13 passages of abnormal rhythm by computer was found to be correct in 98.4 percent of all beats. 25 passages of exercise data, 1-5 min in length, were evaluated by the cardiologist and found to be in agreement in 95.8 percent in measurements of ST level and 91.7 percent in measurements of ST slope.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hsia et al. (1986) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: