Clinical applications of signal-averaged electrocardiography in patients after myocardial infarction.

C. B. Wong, John Robert Windle

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In conclusion, signal-averaged electrocardiography is a useful, noninvasive technique to identify patients after myocardial infarction at risk for future arrhythmic events, especially in conjunction to existing tools, such as 24 hour ambulatory monitoring, echocardiography, nucleotide angiography and coronary angiography. It has a limited positive predictive value, but has an excellent negative predictive value. The optimum time to do signal-averaged electrocardiograms after myocardial infarction is unclear, 6 to 14 days after myocardial infarction has the highest sensitivity. Time domain analysis remains the most common method used to record late potentials. The definition of late potential and the scoring of a high resolution electrocardiogram as normal and abnormal have not yet been resolved. The criteria proposed by the Task Force Committee of the European Society of Cardiology, the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology (see introduction) should be observed at present. Many studies on signal-averaging were done in the prethrombolytic era. In patients who have received thrombolytic therapy, the positive predictive value of signal-averaged electrocardiograms has decreased. There are other limitations in applying signal averaging technique. The faster the ventricular tachycardia is induced in electrophysiological studies, the shorter is the late potential. Thus, a faster tachycardia which causes sudden cardiac death may not be detected by late potentials. The management strategies for patients who have abnormal signal-averaged electrocardiograms after myocardial infarction have not be defined. One should note that any management strategy has to prove that it improves prognosis. More prospective, randomized clinical trials are required to address these issues.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)28-31
Number of pages4
JournalThe Nebraska medical journal
Volume79
Issue number2
StatePublished - Feb 1994

Fingerprint

Electrocardiography
Myocardial Infarction
Ambulatory Monitoring
Thrombolytic Therapy
Sudden Cardiac Death
Advisory Committees
Ventricular Tachycardia
Coronary Angiography
Tachycardia
Echocardiography
Angiography
Nucleotides
Randomized Controlled Trials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Clinical applications of signal-averaged electrocardiography in patients after myocardial infarction. / Wong, C. B.; Windle, John Robert.

In: The Nebraska medical journal, Vol. 79, No. 2, 02.1994, p. 28-31.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{00678a1881ff4ddeb4b6d021700fe8e2,
title = "Clinical applications of signal-averaged electrocardiography in patients after myocardial infarction.",
abstract = "In conclusion, signal-averaged electrocardiography is a useful, noninvasive technique to identify patients after myocardial infarction at risk for future arrhythmic events, especially in conjunction to existing tools, such as 24 hour ambulatory monitoring, echocardiography, nucleotide angiography and coronary angiography. It has a limited positive predictive value, but has an excellent negative predictive value. The optimum time to do signal-averaged electrocardiograms after myocardial infarction is unclear, 6 to 14 days after myocardial infarction has the highest sensitivity. Time domain analysis remains the most common method used to record late potentials. The definition of late potential and the scoring of a high resolution electrocardiogram as normal and abnormal have not yet been resolved. The criteria proposed by the Task Force Committee of the European Society of Cardiology, the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology (see introduction) should be observed at present. Many studies on signal-averaging were done in the prethrombolytic era. In patients who have received thrombolytic therapy, the positive predictive value of signal-averaged electrocardiograms has decreased. There are other limitations in applying signal averaging technique. The faster the ventricular tachycardia is induced in electrophysiological studies, the shorter is the late potential. Thus, a faster tachycardia which causes sudden cardiac death may not be detected by late potentials. The management strategies for patients who have abnormal signal-averaged electrocardiograms after myocardial infarction have not be defined. One should note that any management strategy has to prove that it improves prognosis. More prospective, randomized clinical trials are required to address these issues.",
author = "Wong, {C. B.} and Windle, {John Robert}",
year = "1994",
month = "2",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "79",
pages = "28--31",
journal = "The Nebraska medical journal",
issn = "0091-6730",
publisher = "Nebraska State Medical Association",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical applications of signal-averaged electrocardiography in patients after myocardial infarction.

AU - Wong, C. B.

AU - Windle, John Robert

PY - 1994/2

Y1 - 1994/2

N2 - In conclusion, signal-averaged electrocardiography is a useful, noninvasive technique to identify patients after myocardial infarction at risk for future arrhythmic events, especially in conjunction to existing tools, such as 24 hour ambulatory monitoring, echocardiography, nucleotide angiography and coronary angiography. It has a limited positive predictive value, but has an excellent negative predictive value. The optimum time to do signal-averaged electrocardiograms after myocardial infarction is unclear, 6 to 14 days after myocardial infarction has the highest sensitivity. Time domain analysis remains the most common method used to record late potentials. The definition of late potential and the scoring of a high resolution electrocardiogram as normal and abnormal have not yet been resolved. The criteria proposed by the Task Force Committee of the European Society of Cardiology, the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology (see introduction) should be observed at present. Many studies on signal-averaging were done in the prethrombolytic era. In patients who have received thrombolytic therapy, the positive predictive value of signal-averaged electrocardiograms has decreased. There are other limitations in applying signal averaging technique. The faster the ventricular tachycardia is induced in electrophysiological studies, the shorter is the late potential. Thus, a faster tachycardia which causes sudden cardiac death may not be detected by late potentials. The management strategies for patients who have abnormal signal-averaged electrocardiograms after myocardial infarction have not be defined. One should note that any management strategy has to prove that it improves prognosis. More prospective, randomized clinical trials are required to address these issues.

AB - In conclusion, signal-averaged electrocardiography is a useful, noninvasive technique to identify patients after myocardial infarction at risk for future arrhythmic events, especially in conjunction to existing tools, such as 24 hour ambulatory monitoring, echocardiography, nucleotide angiography and coronary angiography. It has a limited positive predictive value, but has an excellent negative predictive value. The optimum time to do signal-averaged electrocardiograms after myocardial infarction is unclear, 6 to 14 days after myocardial infarction has the highest sensitivity. Time domain analysis remains the most common method used to record late potentials. The definition of late potential and the scoring of a high resolution electrocardiogram as normal and abnormal have not yet been resolved. The criteria proposed by the Task Force Committee of the European Society of Cardiology, the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology (see introduction) should be observed at present. Many studies on signal-averaging were done in the prethrombolytic era. In patients who have received thrombolytic therapy, the positive predictive value of signal-averaged electrocardiograms has decreased. There are other limitations in applying signal averaging technique. The faster the ventricular tachycardia is induced in electrophysiological studies, the shorter is the late potential. Thus, a faster tachycardia which causes sudden cardiac death may not be detected by late potentials. The management strategies for patients who have abnormal signal-averaged electrocardiograms after myocardial infarction have not be defined. One should note that any management strategy has to prove that it improves prognosis. More prospective, randomized clinical trials are required to address these issues.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028376172&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028376172&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8177351

AN - SCOPUS:0028376172

VL - 79

SP - 28

EP - 31

JO - The Nebraska medical journal

JF - The Nebraska medical journal

SN - 0091-6730

IS - 2

ER -