Cited by 253Cardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies

Electrocardiographic criteria for ventricular tachycardia in wide complex left bundle branch block morphology tachycardias

Kindwall, K. Elizabeth, Brown, Joan, Josephson, Mark E.·1988·The American Journal of Cardiology

Abstract

Four electrocardiographic criteria for ventricular tachycardia (VT) were proposed and evaluated. These included (1) an R wave in V1 or V2 of greater than 30-ms duration; (2) any Q wave in V6; (3) a duration of greater than 60 ms from the onset of the QRS to the nadir of the S wave in V1 or V2 and (4) notching on the downstroke of the S wave in V1 or V2. The data showed that all 4 criteria had high predictive accuracy (96 to 100%) and specificity (94 to 100%). The relatively low sensitivities of the 4 criteria alone (30 to 64%) might limit their efficacy. Grouped criteria, however, could differentiate VT from supraventricular tachycardias with high sensitivity, specificity and predictive accuracy. The amount of tracings having either electrocardiographic criteria (1) or (2) or (3) or (4) was determined. The proposed combined criteria had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 89% and a predictive accuracy of 96%. Left axis deviation alone was of no value in distinguishing VT from supraventricular tachycardia. Characteristic patterns were present for left bundle branch block pattern VT associated with anterior and inferior myocardial infarction. In conclusion, the 12-lead electrocardiogram alone, when systematically analyzed, can be used to accurately diagnose the origin of wide complex tachycardias with left bundle branch block pattern. Attention to these criteria may lead to more rapid and effective therapy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0002-9149(88)91169-1

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kindwall, K. E., Brown, J., & Josephson, M. E.
Affiliations
Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Kindwall, K. Elizabeth
Venue
The American Journal of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1988-06
Volume
61
Issue
15
Pages
1279-1283
ISSN
0002-9149 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2102379385
Cited by
253
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 3
FWCI
6.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The American Journal of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL-28093, HL 07346)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Keywords
ventricular tachycardia, wide complex tachycardia, left bundle branch block pattern, electrocardiographic criteria, supraventricular tachycardia with aberrancy, left axis deviation, myocardial infarction, sensitivity and specificity
MeSH terms
Bundle-Branch Block, Diagnosis, Differential, Electrocardiography, Electrodes, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Humans, Myocardial Infarction, Retrospective Studies, Tachycardia, Tachycardia, Supraventricular

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review