Derived epicardial potentials differentiate ischemic ST depression from ST depression secondary to ST elevation in acute inferior myocardial infarction in humans

Department of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Australia.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Impact Factor: 15.34). 10/1989; 14(3):695-702; discussion 703-4. DOI: 10.1016/0735-1097(89)90112-5
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT It was hypothesized that in acute inferior wall myocardial infarction, an additional ischemic area in the subendocardium of the noninfarcting territory would produce a selective current dipole between the infarcting and ischemic regions. A resistance network model to calculate epicardial potentials from body surface electrocardiographic potentials was developed and used to examine the hypothesis in 219 patients with acute inferior myocardial infarction. In the learning set of 110 patients, two characteristic dipole patterns were observed, each associated with a high mortality rate in the ensuing 15 months when compared with that in the remaining patients. In the test set of 109 patients, a double-blind analysis of the patterns showed that the 34 patients with a dipole pattern had a collective mortality rate of 35% at 15 months compared with a 15 month rate of 5% in the remaining patients. In the total group of 219 patients, the magnitude of ST segment elevation and both the magnitude and integral of the area voltage of ST depression on the epicardium were significantly correlated with the mortality rate (p less than 0.0002 for all variables against death at 15 months). This study strongly suggests that ST depression due to ischemia can be differentiated from ST depression secondary to the ST elevation in acute inferior infarction by the examination of epicardial potential distributions.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We compared the performance characteristics of the 12-lead electrocardiography (ECG) with body surface mapping (BSM) in patients presenting for evaluation of symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndromes. The diagnostic test characteristics (sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and predictive values) for 12-lead ECG and BSM were computed using 3 different criterion standards. Of the 150 patients enrolled, 19 were positive for acute coronary syndromes using the criterion standard of cardiac troponin T >0.1 ng/mL, percutaneous coronary intervention, more than 70% stenosis, abnormal noninvasive testing, and coronary artery bypass graft. Changes not known to be old on ECG and BSM had sensitivities of 10.5 (95% confidence interval [CI(95)], 1.8-34.5) and 15.8 (CI(95), 4.2-40.5), and specificities of 90.1 (CI(95), 83.3-94.4) and 86.3 (CI(95), 78.9-91.4), respectively. In this emergency department population, both the BSM and the 12-lead ECG exhibited similar test characteristics.
    The American journal of emergency medicine 10/2009; 27(7):816-22. DOI:10.1016/j.ajem.2008.06.031 · 1.15 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is a complex interplay between the four conductivity values used in the bidomain equation and the resulting electric potential distribution in cardiac tissue arising from subendocardial ischaemia. Based on the three commonly used experimentally derived conductivity data sets, a non-dimensional formulation of the passive bidomain equation is derived, which gives rise naturally to several dimensionless conductivity ratios. The data sets are then used to define a parameter space of these ratios, which is studied by considering the correlation coefficients between different epicardial potential distributions. From this study, it is shown that the ratio of the intracellular longitudinal conductivity to the intracellular transverse conductivity is the key parameter in explaining the differences between the epicardial potential distributions observed with these three data sets.
    Mathematical biosciences 05/2011; 232(2):142-50. DOI:10.1016/j.mbs.2011.05.004 · 1.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Journal of the American College of Cardiology 09/1989; 14(3):703-704. DOI:10.1016/0735-1097(89)90113-7 · 15.34 Impact Factor


Available from