Key result
High-resolution body surface potential mapping revealed statistically significant differences in QRS interval, QT interval, and U-wave integrals between MI patients with and without VT risk.
Why the study?
Does high-resolution body surface potential mapping of the U-wave and T-wave discriminate between myocardial infarction patients with and without ventricular tachycardia?
Cross-Sectional (n=56)
Does high-resolution body surface potential mapping of the U-wave and T-wave discriminate between myocardial infarction patients with and without ventricular tachycardia?
High-resolution body surface potential mapping of U-wave morphology and its relation to the T-wave may aid in arrhythmia risk stratification for patients with prior myocardial infarction.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze the U-wave morphology and its relation to the T-wave in one group of healthy subjects and in two groups of myocardial infarction (MI) patients-with and without ventricular tachycardia (VT) episodes. The context of the U-wave origin was also discussed and the U-wave as a potential marker of VT was investigated. METHODS: The study was carried out on three groups of subjects: 20 healthy subjects, 14 MI patients not at risk of VT, and 22 MI patients at risk of VT. The morphology of the repolarization phase was examined in the high-resolution body surface potential maps recorded from 64 surface ECG leads. The temporal and spatial distributions of several ECG parameters were studied. RESULTS: The U-wave was present in almost all the studied subjects. The spatial heterogeneity and smooth change in both the T- and U-wave shapes on the entire torso were observed in all the studied groups. The statistical significance of discrimination between the MI patients without VT and MI patients with VT was observed for QRS interval, QT interval, U-wave integral, and normalized U-wave integral. CONCLUSIONS: High-resolution measurement of body surface potentials and an advanced data analysis allow for a detailed description of U-wave morphology and its relation to the T-wave. This might be of value in discriminating intracardiac repolarization effects, mechano-electrical feedback, and arrhythmia risk stratification.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fereniec et al. (2013) conducted a cross-sectional in Myocardial infarction (n=56). Myocardial infarction with ventricular tachycardia risk vs. Myocardial infarction without ventricular tachycardia risk and healthy subjects was evaluated on Discrimination between MI patients without VT and MI patients with VT based on ECG parameters (QRS interval, QT interval, U-wave integral, and normalized U-wave integral). High-resolution body surface potential mapping revealed statistically significant differences in QRS interval, QT interval, and U-wave integrals between MI patients with and without VT risk.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: