Key result
Cornell voltage product-based ECG criteria demonstrated the most consistent diagnostic performance for detecting left ventricular hypertrophy, with an AUROC of 0.76, 64% sensitivity, and 80% specificity.
Why the study?
ECG criteria for detecting LVH were largely derived from non-African populations, leaving their diagnostic performance uncertain in Black African adults with untreated hypertension.
Do established ECG criteria accurately detect left ventricular hypertrophy compared to echocardiography in Black African adults with untreated hypertension?
Population
1,125 adults with untreated, uncomplicated hypertension from rural Tanzania and Lesotho
Comparison
Established ECG-LVH criteria vs echocardiographically assessed LVMI
Design
Trial subanalysis
Authors
Loading...
May support population-specific ECG thresholds in Black African hypertensives; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
Cross-Sectional (n=1,125)
Yes
Do established ECG criteria accurately detect left ventricular hypertrophy compared to echocardiography in Black African adults with untreated hypertension?
Effect estimate: AUROC 0.76
p-value: p=< 0.001
Cornell voltage product-based measures provide moderate diagnostic accuracy for LVH in hypertensive Black African adults, outperforming voltage-only criteria and highlighting the need for population-specific cut-offs.
Vischer et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Untreated, uncomplicated hypertension (n=1,125). ECG criteria for left ventricular hypertrophy (Cornell voltage product) vs. Echocardiographically assessed left ventricular mass index (LVMI) was evaluated on Diagnostic performance of ECG-LVH criteria for detecting left ventricular hypertrophy (AUROC 0.76, p=< 0.001). Cornell voltage product-based ECG criteria demonstrated the most consistent diagnostic performance for detecting left ventricular hypertrophy, with an AUROC of 0.76, 64% sensitivity, and 80% specificity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: