Why the study?
Do body surface isopotential maps differ between non-transmural and transmural myocardial infarctions in a simulated ventricular model?
Do body surface isopotential maps differ between non-transmural and transmural myocardial infarctions in a simulated ventricular model?
Computer simulation of ventricular excitation suggests that body surface isopotential maps could clinically differentiate non-transmural from transmural myocardial infarctions.
May enable noninvasive MI depth differentiation on ECG; leaves open translation from ventricular models to patients.
Simulation by a digital computer of excitation spread in a human ventricular model produced displays of body surface isopotential maps. Localization of model myocardial infarctions to non-transmural and transmural sites produced distinctive differences in these displayed isopotential maps. The body surface directly over the infarcted lesion was negative in potential only in the first half period of the QRS complex and then became positive. The model demonstrated that this later positive potential was due to delayed arrival of excitation to the subepicardial layer outside of the subendocardial lesion. While, in transmural infarction, the overlying body surface remained negative in potential throughout the QRS complex. It is expected that body surface isopotential maps will become clinically available and will permit helpful differential diagnoses between non-transumral and transmural myocardial infarctions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ishikawa et al. (1980) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: