| Autor: |
Estrada, A. H., Spake, A., Kleman, M. E., Leeder, D., Blischok‐Lapekas, D., Margiocco, M., Gentile‐Solomon, J., Piscitelli, N., Szlosek, D. |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Journal of Small Animal Practice; Feb2021, Vol. 62 Issue 2, p145-149, 5p |
| Abstrakt: |
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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text