ArticleJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2023
Evaluation of the electrocardiogram RV
Article in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Two-Dimensional Speckle Tracking Echocardiography and Real-Time Three-Dimensional Echocardiography in Marathon Runners: A Study of Left Atrium.Clinical cardiology · 2025Article
- Regulatory mechanisms of exercise-induced physiological cardiac hypertrophy: progress and prospects.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the electrocardiogram RVJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To assess the value of electrocardiogram (ECG) RV5/V6 criteria for diagnosing left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in marathons. A total of 112 marathon runners who met the requirements for "Class A1" events certified by the Chinese Athletics Association in Changzhou City were selected, and their general clinical information was collected. ECG examinations were performed using a Fukuda FX7402 Cardimax Comprehensive Electrocardiograph Automatic Analyser, whereas routine cardiac ultrasound examinations were performed using a Philips EPIQ 7C echocardiography system. Real-time 3-dimensional echocardiography (RT-3DE) was performed to acquire 3-dimensional images of the left ventricle and to calculate the left ventricular mass index (LVMI). According to the LVMI criteria of the American Society of Echocardiography for the diagnosis of LVH, the participants were divided into an LVMI normal group (n = 96) and an LVH group (n = 16). The correlation between the ECG RV5/V6 criteria and LVH in marathon runners was analysed using multiple linear regression stratified by sex and compared with the Cornell (SV3 + RaVL), modified Cornell (SD + RaVL), Sokolow-Lyon (SV1 + RV5/V6), Peguero-Lo Presti (SD + SV4), SV1, SV3, SV4, and SD criteria. In marathon runners, the ECG parameters SV3 + RaVL, SD + RaVL, SV1 + RV5/V6, SD + SV4, SV3, SD, and RV5/V6 were able to identify LVH (all p < .05). When stratified by sex, linear regression analysis revealed that a significantly higher number of ECG RV5/V6 criteria were evident in the LVH group than in the LVMI normal group (p < .05), both with no adjustment and after initial adjustment (including age and body mass index), as well as after full adjustment (including age, body mass index, interventricular septal thickness, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, left ventricular posterior wall thickness, and history of hypertension). Additionally, curve fitting showed that the ECG RV5/V6 values increased with increasing LVMI in marathon runners, exhibiting a nearly linear positive correlation. In conclusions, the ECG RV5/V6 criteria were correlated with LVH in marathon runners.
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.