ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2020
Usefulness of ECG to differentiate apical hypertrophic cardiomyopathy from non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApical hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (ApHCM) is a phenotypic variant of nonobstructive HCM. ApHCM is characterized by left ventricular hypertrophy involve the distal apex. The electrocardiographic character of ApHCM can mimic non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS), triggering a series of studies and treatments that may be unnecessary. This study aimed to clarify the electrocardiogram (ECG) differences between the two diseases.
methodsInitial ECG recordings of 41 patients with ApHCM and 72 patients with NSTEACS were analyzed retrospectively. We analyzed the voltage of negative T (neg T) and R wave, the change of ST-segment as well as the number of leads with neg T wave in the 12-lead ECGs.
resultsAcross the 12-lead ECGs, the magnitude of R wave significantly differed between ApHCM and NSTEACS in 10 leads excluding leads aVR and V1. ApHCM was associated with a greater maximal amplitude of R wave in lead V5 (3.13 ± 1.08 vs. 1.38 ± 0.73 mV, P < 0.001). The magnitude of T wave significantly differed between ApHCM and NSTEACS in 10 leads excluding leads II and V1. ApHCM was associated with a greater maximal amplitude of neg T wave in lead V4 (0.85 ± 0.69 vs. 0.35 ± 0.23 mV, P < 0.001). The frequency of giant neg T (1mv or more) wave was higher in ApHCM (36.5% vs. 0%, P < 0.001). The magnitude of ST-segment deviation significantly differed between ApHCM and NSTEACS in 10 leads excluding leads aVF and V2. ApHCM was associated with a greater maximal amplitude of ST-segment depression in lead V5 (0.19 ± 0.07 vs. 0.03 ± 0.06 mV, P < 0.001). The number of leads with neg T wave also differed between ApHCM and NSTEACS (6.75 ± 1.42 vs. 6.08 ± 1.51, P = 0.046). The sum of R wave in lead V5, neg T wave in lead V6 and ST-segment depression in lead V4 > 2.585 mV identified ApHCM with 90.2% sensibility and 87.5% specificity, representing the highest diagnostic accuracy.
conclusionsCompared with NSTEACS patients, ApHCM patients presented higher R and neg T wave voltage as well as a greater ST-segment depression in the 12-lead ECG. The ECG characteristics can help to differentiate ApHCM from NSTEACS in clinical setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.