Why the study?
Does the evaluation of multiple-lead QRS changes (epsilon R) combined with ST segment changes during exercise testing improve the diagnosis of coronary artery disease in patients with chest pain syndromes?
Does the evaluation of multiple-lead QRS changes (epsilon R) combined with ST segment changes during exercise testing improve the diagnosis of coronary artery disease in patients with chest pain syndromes?
Combining multiple-lead R wave increases with ST-segment changes during exercise testing provides high diagnostic accuracy for severe, multivessel coronary artery disease and reflects underlying left ventricular dysfunction.
May aid exercise test interpretation for multivessel CAD; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
To evaluate the diagnostic potential and hemodynamic significance of exercise-induced multiple-lead QRS changes, we studied exercise test responses in 230 patients with chest pain syndromes undergoing Bruce protocol exercise tests. When increases in the R waves of multiple ECG leads (epsilon R) plus ST segment change greater than 1 mm were present, 74 of 75 patients (99%) had coronary disease; this was a higher percentage than that achieved with either measurement alone or when ST change was combined with increase in R in a single lead. Sixty-four of the 75 patients (85%) had multivessel disease, the most severe form of coronary artery disease. Left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (both at rest and after left ventriculography), presence and degree of resting ventricular asynergy, and ejection fraction were all significantly more abnormal in patients whose epsilon R increased, regardless of ST-segment change. Further, in patients who stopped exercise because of cardiac symptoms, exercise duration and the product of heart rate times blood pressure were significantly lower when epsilon R increased. Thus, the mechanism for the increase in epsilon R with exercise in patients with coronary artery disease appears to be related to abnormalities in left ventricular function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Berman et al. (1980) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: