Key result
The non-planarity index was significantly higher in patients with myocardial infarction (23.8%) and primary myocardial diseases (24.8%) compared to normal subjects (11.5%, p<0.001).
Why the study?
Does the non-planarity index of the QRS complex in vectorcardiograms differentiate between normal conditions, myocardial injury, and conduction disturbances?
Observational (n=163)
No
Does the non-planarity index of the QRS complex in vectorcardiograms differentiate between normal conditions, myocardial injury, and conduction disturbances?
Absolute Event Rate: 23.8% vs 11.5%
p-value: p=<0.001
The non-planarity index of the QRS complex is significantly increased in conditions with diffuse myocardial injury or diffuse conduction disturbances, suggesting its potential utility as a diagnostic parameter.
Elevated non-planarity index may signal myocardial injury; leaves open its diagnostic utility pending prospective validation.
Vectorcardiograms in 163 clinical subjects of normal and various abnormal conditions obtained by Frank lead system and in 17 dogs of experimental myocardial injury or intra-ventricular conduction disturbances by McFee-Parungao method were transformed by exchange of axes of co-ordinates by the method of McFee et al. The non-planarity index, from the axes of the transformed frontal plane, was significantly higher during myocardial injury and bundle branch blocks as well as from diffuse intra-myocardial conduction disturbances than during normal clinical cases and the control records in animal experiments. The non-planarity index was not increased in localized block of the conduction system in dogs. Therefore, results suggest that this index might be a useful parameter to assess these conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hiraoka et al. (1982) conducted an observational in Myocardial injury and intra-ventricular conduction disturbances (n=163). Myocardial infarction vs. Normal subjects was evaluated on Non-planarity index (p=<0.001). The non-planarity index was significantly higher in patients with myocardial infarction (23.8%) and primary myocardial diseases (24.8%) compared to normal subjects (11.5%, p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: