Why the study?
QRS notching and slurring are key morphological markers of Strauss-defined LBBB, but the effect of ECG filtering on QRS morphology and the diagnosis of Strauss-defined LBBB required evaluation.
Does inappropriate surface ECG signal filtering reduce the ability to recognize Strauss-defined left bundle branch block in CRT candidates?
Does inappropriate surface ECG signal filtering reduce the ability to recognize Strauss-defined left bundle branch block in CRT candidates?
Strong ECG filtering (0.05-25 Hz) significantly impairs the diagnosis of Strauss-defined LBBB, highlighting the need for a bandwidth of at least 0.05-60 Hz for physicians and 0.05-150 Hz for automated algorithms.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Strong filtering may reduce QRS marker detection; leaves open effects on clinical ECG interpretation pending prospective validation.
Background and Aims QRS notching and slurring are key morphological markers of Strauss-defined left bundle branch block (LBBB). The study aimed to evaluate the effect of ECG filtering on QRS morphology and the diagnosis of Strauss-defined LBBB. Methods This retrospective study included 53 CRT candidates who underwent 12-lead ECG recording before device implantation. ECGs were processed under four filtering conditions: unfiltered, strong filtering (0.05–25 Hz), moderate filtering (0.05–60 Hz), and mild filtering (0.05–150 Hz). QRS notching, slurring, and plateau were visually assessed in leads I, aVL, V1, V2, V5, and V6. Strauss-defined LBBB was independently evaluated by three physicians and an automated algorithm. Results We identified 196 QRS markers on unfiltered ECGs. Strong filtering reduced the total marker count by 22% (153 vs. 196) and altered marker morphology, with 48% of notches converting to slurs and 38% of slurs disappearing. In contrast, moderate and mild filtering caused minimal changes, with ≤2% reduction in total markers and <10% of transformations. Under strong filtering, three physicians and an automated algorithm underdiagnosed Strauss-LBBB in about one-third to one-half of cases. Diagnostic performance remained comparable to unfiltered ECGs at 0.05–60 Hz for physicians and at 0.05–150 Hz for the algorithm. Conclusion ECG signal filtering significantly influences the ability of physicians and an automated algorithm to diagnose Strauss-LBBB. To correctly diagnose Strauss-LBBB, a bandwidth of at least 0.05–60 Hz is required for physicians and 0.05–150 Hz for the automated algorithm.QRS marker transformations
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: