Cargando…
Comparison of Different Electrocardiography with Vectorcardiography Transformations
This paper deals with transformations from electrocardiographic (ECG) to vectorcardiographic (VCG) leads. VCG provides better sensitivity, for example for the detection of myocardial infarction, ischemia, and hypertrophy. However, in clinical practice, measurement of VCG is not usually used because...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6678609/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31336798 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s19143072 |
_version_ | 1783441141443592192 |
---|---|
author | Jaros, Rene Martinek, Radek Danys, Lukas |
author_facet | Jaros, Rene Martinek, Radek Danys, Lukas |
author_sort | Jaros, Rene |
collection | PubMed |
description | This paper deals with transformations from electrocardiographic (ECG) to vectorcardiographic (VCG) leads. VCG provides better sensitivity, for example for the detection of myocardial infarction, ischemia, and hypertrophy. However, in clinical practice, measurement of VCG is not usually used because it requires additional electrodes placed on the patient’s body. Instead, mathematical transformations are used for deriving VCG from 12-leads ECG. In this work, Kors quasi-orthogonal transformation, inverse Dower transformation, Kors regression transformation, and linear regression-based transformations for deriving P wave (PLSV) and QRS complex (QLSV) are implemented and compared. These transformation methods were not yet compared before, so we have selected them for this paper. Transformation methods were compared for the data from the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) database and their accuracy was evaluated using a mean squared error (MSE) and a correlation coefficient (R) between the derived and directly measured Frank’s leads. Based on the statistical analysis, Kors regression transformation was significantly more accurate for the derivation of the X and Y leads than the others. For the Z lead, there were no statistically significant differences in the medians between Kors regression transformation and the PLSV and QLSV methods. This paper thoroughly compared multiple VCG transformation methods to conventional VCG Frank’s orthogonal lead system, used in clinical practice. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6678609 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66786092019-08-19 Comparison of Different Electrocardiography with Vectorcardiography Transformations Jaros, Rene Martinek, Radek Danys, Lukas Sensors (Basel) Article This paper deals with transformations from electrocardiographic (ECG) to vectorcardiographic (VCG) leads. VCG provides better sensitivity, for example for the detection of myocardial infarction, ischemia, and hypertrophy. However, in clinical practice, measurement of VCG is not usually used because it requires additional electrodes placed on the patient’s body. Instead, mathematical transformations are used for deriving VCG from 12-leads ECG. In this work, Kors quasi-orthogonal transformation, inverse Dower transformation, Kors regression transformation, and linear regression-based transformations for deriving P wave (PLSV) and QRS complex (QLSV) are implemented and compared. These transformation methods were not yet compared before, so we have selected them for this paper. Transformation methods were compared for the data from the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) database and their accuracy was evaluated using a mean squared error (MSE) and a correlation coefficient (R) between the derived and directly measured Frank’s leads. Based on the statistical analysis, Kors regression transformation was significantly more accurate for the derivation of the X and Y leads than the others. For the Z lead, there were no statistically significant differences in the medians between Kors regression transformation and the PLSV and QLSV methods. This paper thoroughly compared multiple VCG transformation methods to conventional VCG Frank’s orthogonal lead system, used in clinical practice. MDPI 2019-07-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6678609/ /pubmed/31336798 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s19143072 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Jaros, Rene Martinek, Radek Danys, Lukas Comparison of Different Electrocardiography with Vectorcardiography Transformations |
title | Comparison of Different Electrocardiography with Vectorcardiography Transformations |
title_full | Comparison of Different Electrocardiography with Vectorcardiography Transformations |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Different Electrocardiography with Vectorcardiography Transformations |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Different Electrocardiography with Vectorcardiography Transformations |
title_short | Comparison of Different Electrocardiography with Vectorcardiography Transformations |
title_sort | comparison of different electrocardiography with vectorcardiography transformations |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6678609/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31336798 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s19143072 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jarosrene comparisonofdifferentelectrocardiographywithvectorcardiographytransformations AT martinekradek comparisonofdifferentelectrocardiographywithvectorcardiographytransformations AT danyslukas comparisonofdifferentelectrocardiographywithvectorcardiographytransformations |