Peguero-Lo Presti criteria for diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy: a cardiac magnetic resonance validation study.
Journal
Journal of cardiovascular medicine (Hagerstown, Md.)
ISSN: 1558-2035
Titre abrégé: J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101259752
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2020
Jun 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
7
4
2020
medline:
7
4
2021
entrez:
7
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The diagnostic performance of the new Peguero-Lo Presti ECG criteria for left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) has not been validated by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of Peguero-Lo Presti, Cornell and Sokolow--Lyon voltage criteria for LVH as defined by CMR in an all-comers European population. A total of 240 consecutive patients referred for CMR who had a concomitant electrocardiogram for review were evaluated. LVH group patients were defined according to the reference values for sex and age of left ventricular mass index (LVMi). A control group, adjusted by sex, was randomly selected from a population without LVH. We applied the ECG voltage criteria to both groups and evaluated their diagnostic accuracy. Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were compared. Two hundred and forty patients (mean age 63 years; 65% men) were divided into two groups (LVH n = 149; control n = 91). The main causes of LVH were hypertension (24.8%) and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (21.5%). The remaining patients of this group had a diagnosis of dilated cardiomyopathy (14.8%), valvular heart disease (7.4%) and infiltrative cardiomyopathy (2.0%). Overall, the sensitivity for LVH diagnosis of the Peguero-Lo Presti criteria outperformed both the Cornell (47 vs. 29%, P < 0.001) and Sokolow--Lyon voltage criteria (vs. 25%, P < 0.001). The specificities of all the criteria were above 94%, without significant differences between them. In an all-comers European population with LVH defined by CMR, the criteria of Peguero-Lo Presti showed increased sensitivity for this diagnosis, when compared with the Sokolow--Lyon and Cornell voltage criteria. As such, they could become the preferred ECG diagnostic tool when evaluating patients at risk for LVH.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32251077
doi: 10.2459/JCM.0000000000000964
pii: 01244665-202006000-00007
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
437-443Références
Marwick TH, Gillebert TC, Aurigemma G, et al. Recommendations on the use of echocardiography in adult hypertension: a report from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE). J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2015; 28:727–754.
Dai S, Ayres NA, Harrist RB, Bricker JT, Labarthe DR. Validity of echocardiographic measurement in an epidemiological study. Project HeartBeat! Hypertension 1999; 34:236–241.
Hudsmith LE, Petersen SE, Francis JM, Robson MD, Neubauer S. Normal human left and right ventricular and left atrial dimensions using steady state free precession magnetic resonance imaging. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2005; 7:775–782.
Myerson SG, Bellenger NG, Pennell DJ. Assessment of left ventricular mass by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Hypertension 2002; 39:750–755.
Buchner S, Debl K, Haimerl J, et al. Electrocardiographic diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy in aortic valve disease: evaluation of ECG criteria by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2009; 11:18.
Grothues F, Smith GC, Moon JC, et al. Comparison of interstudy reproducibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance with two-dimensional echocardiography in normal subjects and in patients with heart failure or left ventricular hypertrophy. Am J Cardiol 2002; 90:29–34.
Mor-Avi V, Sugeng L, Weinert L, et al. Fast measurement of left ventricular mass with real-time three-dimensional echocardiography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation 2004; 110:1814–1818.
Bellenger NG, Davies LC, Francis JM, Coats AJ, Pennell DJ. Reduction in sample size for studies of remodeling in heart failure by the use of cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2000; 2:271–278.
Estes EH Jr, Jackson KP. The electrocardiogram in left ventricular hypertrophy: past and future. J Electrocardiol 2009; 42:589–592.
Casale PN, Devereux RB, Kligfield P, et al. Electrocardiographic detection of left ventricular hypertrophy: development and prospective validation of improved criteria. J Am Coll Cardiol 1985; 6:572–580.
Sokolow M, Lyon TP. The ventricular complex in left ventricular hypertrophy as obtained by unipolar precordial and limb leads. American Heart Journal 1949; 37:161–186.
Levy D, Salomon M, D’Agostino RB, Belanger AJ, Kannel WB. Prognostic implications of baseline electrocardiographic features and their serial changes in subjects with left ventricular hypertrophy. Circulation 1994; 90:1786–1793.
Devereux RB, Casale PN, Eisenberg RR, Miller DH, Kligfield P. Electrocardiographic detection of left ventricular hypertrophy using echocardiographic determination of left ventricular mass as the reference standard. Comparison of standard criteria, computer diagnosis and physician interpretation. J Am Coll Cardiol 1984; 3:82–87.
Rider OJ, Ntusi N, Bull SC, et al. Improvements in ECG accuracy for diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy in obesity. Heart (British Cardiac Society) 2016; 102:1566–1572.
Schillaci G, Verdecchia P, Borgioni C, et al. Improved electrocardiographic diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy. Am J Cardiol 1994; 74:714–719.
Pewsner D, Juni P, Egger M, Battaglia M, Sundstrom J, Bachmann LM. Accuracy of electrocardiography in diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy in arterial hypertension: systematic review. BMJ 2007; 335:711.
Peguero JG, Lo Presti S, Perez J, Issa O, Brenes JC, Tolentino A. Electrocardiographic criteria for the diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 69:1694–1703.
Sun G-Z, Wang H-Y, Ye N, Sun Y-X. Assessment of novel Peguero-Lo Presti electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy criteria in a large Asian population: newer may not be better. Can J Cardiol 2018; 34:1153–1157.
Ramchand J, Sampaio Rodrigues T, Kearney LG, Patel SK, Srivastava PM, Burrell LM. The Peguero-Lo Presti electrocardiographic criteria predict all-cause mortality in patients with aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 70:1831–1832.
Jain A, Tandri H, Dalal D, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic utility of electrocardiography for left ventricular hypertrophy defined by magnetic resonance imaging in relationship to ethnicity: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Am Heart J 2010; 159:652–658.
Ha LD, Elbadawi A, Froelicher VF. Limited relationship of voltage criteria for electrocardiogram left ventricular hypertrophy to cardiovascular mortality. Am J Med 2018; 131:101.e1–101.e8.
Kawel-Boehm N, Maceira A, Valsangiacomo-Buechel ER, et al. Normal values for cardiovascular magnetic resonance in adults and children. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2015; 17:29.
Hancock EW, Deal BJ, Mirvis DM, et al. AHA/ACCF/HRS recommendations for the standardization and interpretation of the electrocardiogram: part V: electrocardiogram changes associated with cardiac chamber hypertrophy: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Electrocardiography and Arrhythmias Committee, Council on Clinical Cardiology; the American College of Cardiology Foundation; and the Heart Rhythm Society. Endorsed by the International Society for Computerized Electrocardiology. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 53:992–1002.
Okin PM, Roman MJ, Devereux RB, Kligfield P. Time-voltage area of the QRS for the identification of left ventricular hypertrophy. Hypertension 1996; 27:251–258.
Nasir JM, Rubal BJ, Jones SO, Shah AD. The effects of body mass index on surface electrocardiograms in young adults. Journal of Electrocardiology 2012; 45:646–651.