Evaluation of beat-to-beat ventricular repolarization lability from standard 12‐lead ECG during acute myocardial ischemia

Abstract

BackgroundAcute myocardial ischemia is a common cause of ventricular arrhythmias, yet recent ECG methods predicting susceptibility to ventricular tachyarrhythmia have not been fully evaluated during spontaneous ischemia. We sought to evaluate the clinical utility of alternans and non-alternans components of repolarization variability from the standard 10-second 12-lead ECG signals to risk stratify patients with acute chest pain. MethodsWe enrolled consecutive, non-traumatic, chest pain patients transported through Emergency Medical Services (EMS) to three tertiary care hospitals with cardiac catheterization lab capabilities in Pittsburgh, PA. ECG signals were manually annotated by an electrophysiologist, then automatically processed using a custom-written software. Both T wave alternans (TWA) and non-alternans repolarization variability (NARV) were calculated using the absolute RMS differences over the repolarization window between odd/even averaged beats and between consecutive averaged pairs, respectively. The primary study outcome was the presence of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) documented by cardiac angiography. ResultsAfter excluding patients with secondary repolarization changes (n=123) and those with excessive noise (n=90), our final sample included 537 patients (age 57±16years, 56% males). Patients with AMI (n=47, 9%) had higher TWA and NARV values (p<0.01). Mean RR correlated with TWA, and noise measures correlated with TWA and NARV, after adjusting for potential confounders. There was a high collinearity between TWA and NARV, and each was separately predictive of AMI after controlling for number of analyzed beats, noise measures, and other clinical variables. ConclusionsDespite limitations imposed by signal quality, TWA and NARV are higher in patients with AMI, even after correction for potential confounders. The clinical value of TWA and NARV derived from standard ECG using our time-domain RMS method is questionable due to the small number of beats and significant noise.