Cargando…
Diagnostic accuracy of computer aided electrocardiogram analysis in dogs
OBJECTIVES: Evaluation of a computerised electrocardiogram algorithm compared to the interpretation of a team of board‐certified veterinary cardiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross‐sectional retrospective cohort study. A total of 399 electronic canine electrocardiogram recordings scree...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7898890/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33260257 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jsap.13267 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVES: Evaluation of a computerised electrocardiogram algorithm compared to the interpretation of a team of board‐certified veterinary cardiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross‐sectional retrospective cohort study. A total of 399 electronic canine electrocardiogram recordings screened from 1391 electrocardiograms were enrolled in the study. A panel of seven cardiologists, masked to patient information, evaluated electrocardiograms for the following: P‐wave amplitude and duration; PR‐interval; R‐wave amplitude; QRS duration; heart rate; mean electrical axis; and final overall diagnosis for the detection of arrhythmia and any abnormal electrocardiogram anomaly. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the electrocardiogram algorithm for detecting arrhythmias was 99.7% (95% confidence intervals, CI: 98.5 to 99.9) and the specificity was 99.5% (95% CI: 98.0 to 99.9) compared to the consensus result created by panel of cardiologists. The sensitivity of the algorithm for the detection of any electrocardiogram anomaly, including abnormal measurements, was 71.3% (95% CI: 65.5 to 76.7) and the specificity was 35.1% (95% CI: 27.0 to 43.8) compared to the panel of cardiologists. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The electrocardiogram algorithm was shown to have high sensitivity for the detection of arrhythmias, but not all electrocardiogram anomalies. The results support the use of this algorithm as a tool to aid in the triage of the electrocardiogram workflow. |
---|