Continuous Electrocardiographic Monitoring for Myocardial Ischemia

  • M. D. Seeberger
  • D. Scheidegger
Conference paper
Part of the Yearbook of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine book series (YEARBOOK, volume 1996)

Abstract

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is one of the most important causes of morbidity and mortality in western communities [1]. Its importance in patients needing emergency treatment or intensive care is that it may cause huge additional health care costs and determine the outcome, even if it is not the patient’s primary health problem. For instance, in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, concomitant CAD is responsible for approximately 50% of perioperative deaths [2, 3]. The standard 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) is an important diagnostic tool for detecting CAD in emergency patients, e.g. in those who present with symptoms such as typical or atypical chest pain, traumatic or non-traumatic hypotension, or pulse irregularities. ECG is also regarded as a useful preoperative screening test in all surgical patients with known or suspected cardiac disease, and in asymptomatic men over 40 years of age and women over 50 years of age [4]. However, a normal baseline 12-lead ECG does not exclude the possibility that silent myocardial ischemia may develop at any time during transport of emergency patients, in the operating room, or in the intensive care unit (ICU). Continuous ECG monitoring may detect developing ischemia, which is frequently silent, commonly precedes clinical events, and can be treated with anti-ischemia therapy [5]. Because continuously monitoring all 12-standard ECG leads [6] is impractical in most clinical settings, it is critically important to select the most sensitive lead(s) for detecting myocardial ischemia in patients at risk. Lead selection should be guided by scientific evidence of the sensitivity of single leads but it can also be influenced by the monitoring system and limitations to electrode placement as a result of the injury or the site of surgery.

Keywords

Emergency Patient Silent Myocardial Ischemia Precordial Lead Lead Selection Bipolar Lead 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Tarhan S, Moffitt EA, Taylor WF, Giuliani ER (1977) Myocardial infarction after general anesthesia. Anesth Analg 56: 455–461PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hertzer NR (1987) Basic data concerning associated coronary disease in peripheral vascular patients. Ann Vasc Surg 1: 616–620PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roger VL, Ballard DJ, Hallett JJ, Osmundson PJ, Puetz PA, Gersh BJ (1989) Influence of coronary artery disease on morbidity and mortality after abdominal aortic aneurysmectomy: A population-based study, 1971–1987. J Am Coll Cardiol 14: 1245–1252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jiang W, Blumenthal JA, Hanson MW, et al (1995) Relative importance of electrode placement over number of channels in transient myocardial ischemia detection by Holter monitoring. Am J Cardiol 76: 350–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Raby KE, Barry J, Creager MA, Cook EF, Weisberg MC, Goldman L (1992) Detection and significance of intraoperative and postoperative myocardial ischemia in peripheral vascular surgery. JAMA 268: 222–227PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fesmire FM, Smith EE (1993) Continuous 12-lead electrocardiograph monitoring in the emergency department. Am J Emerg Med 11: 54–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mirvis D, Berson AS, Goldberger A, et al (1989) Instrumentation and practice standards for electrocardiographic monitoring in special care units. Circulation 79: 464–471PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Slogoff S, Keats AS, David Y, Igo SR (1990) Incidence of perioperative myocardial ischemia detected by different electrocardiographic systems. Anesthesiology 73: 1074–1081PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Einthoven W, Fahr G, de Waart A (1950) On the direction and manifest size of the variations of potential in the human heart and on the influence of the position of the heart on the form of the electrocardiogram. Am Heart J 40: 163–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goldberger E (1953) Unipolar lead electrocardiography and vector cardiography. Lea & Febiger, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Johnson FD, Lepeschkin E (1955) Selected papers of Dr. Frank N. Wilson. JW Edwards, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zalenski RJ, Cooke D, Rydman R, Sloan EP, Murphy DG (1993) Assessing the diagnostic value of an ECG containing leads V4R, V8, and V9: The 15-lead ECG. Ann Emerg Med 22: 786–793PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blackburn H, Katigbak R (1964) What electrocardiographic leads to take after exercise? Am Heart J 67: 184–185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mason R, Likar I (1966) A new system of multiple-lead exercise electrocardiography. Am Heart J 71: 196–205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kleiner J, Nelson W, Boland M (1978) The 12-lead electrocardiogram in exercise testing. Arch Intern Med 138: 1572–1573PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Phibbs B, Buckels L (1975) Comparative yield of ECG leads in multistage stress testing. Am Heart J 90: 275–276PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Merin R, Lowenstein E, Gelman S (1986) Is anesthesia beneficial for the ischemic heart? III (editorial). Anesthesiology 64: 137–140PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    London MJ, Hollenberg M, Wong MG, et al (1988) Intraoperative myocardial ischemia: Localization by continuous 12-lead electrocardiography. Anesthesiology 69: 232–241PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kennedy HL (1992) Importance of the standard electrocardiogram in ambulatory (Holter) electrocardiography. Am Heart J 123: 1660–1677PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Seeberger M, Friedli D, Skarvan K (1991) Ueberwachung inferiorer Myokardbezirke: unterschiedliche Wertigkeit der Ableitungen II, III und aVF im Standard- vs. Holter-EKG. Z Kardiologie 80: 40a (Abst)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chaitman BR, Hanson JS (1981) Comparative sensitivity and specificity of exercise electrocardiographic lead systems. Am J Cardiol 47: 1335–1349PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tanabe T, Yoshioka K, Ide M, Kanemoto N, Suzuki Y (1994) Evaluation of a nine-lead Holter monitor for identifying and localizing ischemia and coronary artery disease detected by quantitative thallium-201 tomography. Am Heart J 128: 956–965PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Osterhues HH, Eggeling T, Kochs M, Hombach V (1994) Improved detection of transient myocardial ischemia by a new lead combination: Value of bipolar lead Nehb D for Holter monitoring. Am Heart J 127: 559–566PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. D. Seeberger
  • D. Scheidegger

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations