The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Prediction of serious arrhythmic events after myocardial infarction: Signal-averaged electrocardiogram, holter monitoring and radionuclide ventriculography
Open accessAbstract
Noninvasive assessment was undertaken before hospital discharge in 210 patients who had recovered from acute myocardial infarction. This comprised signal-averaged electrocardiography, Holter monitoring and radionuclide left ventriculography. An abnormal signal-averaged electrocardiogram was defined as the presence of a low voltage signal less than 20 microV in the terminal 40 ms of the filtered QRS complex or a long filtered QRS complex greater than 120 ms. During a follow-up period of 6 months to 2 years (median 14 months), 15 patients had arrhythmic events: eight died suddenly and seven presented with sustained, symptomatic ventricular tachycardia. Using univariate analysis, abnormalities in each of the three noninvasive tests were able to predict arrhythmic events. Stepwise logistic regression demonstrated that each test was independently significant in predicting outcome, with a left ventricular ejection fraction less than 40% being the most powerful variable (beta = 2.8, p less than 0.005). This process generated an algorithm that allowed assessment of combinations of variables: the finding of an abnormal signal-averaged electrocardiogram in the presence of an ejection fraction less than 40% identified patients with a 34% probability of arrhythmic events. By contrast, in patients with left ventricular dysfunction but a normal signal-averaged tracing, the risk of arrhythmic events was 4% (p less than 0.001). This combination of variables was associated with a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 89%. Hence, using a combination of noninvasive tests after myocardial infarction, patients can be stratified according to risk of serious arrhythmic events.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Farrell, T. G., Bashir, Y., Cripps, T., Malik, M., Poloniecki, J., Bennett, E. D., Ward, D. E., & Camm, A. J. (1991) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/0735-1097(91)90791-7 · Cited by 731
Adverse consequences of high sympathetic nervous activity in the failing human heart
Kaye, D. M., Lefkovits, J., Jennings, G. L., Bergin, P., Broughton, A., & Esler, M. D. (1995) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/0735-1097(95)00332-0 · Cited by 665
Farb, A., Tang, A. L., Burke, A. P., Sessums, L., Liang, Y., & Virmani, R. (1995) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.92.7.1701 · Cited by 417
Buxton, A. E., Lee, K. L., Hafley, G. E., Pires, L. A., Fisher, J. D., Gold, M. R., Josephson, M. E., Lehmann, M. H., & Prystowsky, E. N. (2007) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2007.04.095 · Cited by 356
Breithardt, G., Cain, M. E., el-Sherif, N., Flowers, N. C., Hombach, V, Janse, M., Simson, M. B., & Steinbeck, G. (1991) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.83.4.1481 · Cited by 310
Metadata
- Authors
- Kuchar, D. L., Thorburn, C. W., & Sammel, N. L.
- Venue
- Journal of the American College of Cardiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1987-03
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 531-538
- ISSN
- 0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2002341470
- Cited by
- 421
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 20.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prediction of serious arrhythmic events after myocardial infarction: Signal-averaged electrocardiogram, holter monitoring and radionuclide ventriculography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0735-1097(87)80045-1
- The paper
- Kuchar, D. L., Thorburn, C. W., & Sammel, N. L. (1987). Prediction of serious arrhythmic events after myocardial infarction: Signal-averaged electrocardiogram, holter monitoring and radionuclide ventriculography. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0735-1097(87)80045-1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.