Cited by 91Cardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasECG Monitoring and Analysis

Comparison of five electrocardiographic methods for differentiation of wide QRS-complex tachycardias

Open access
Jastrzebski, Marek, Kukla, Piotr, Czarnecka, Danuta, Kawecka-Jaszcz, Kalina·2012·EP Europace

Abstract

AIMS: To compare the sensitivity (SN), specificity (SP), and diagnostic accuracy (ACC) for ventricular tachycardia (VT) diagnosis of five electrocardiographic methods for wide QRS-complex tachycardia (WCT) differentiation, specifically the Brugada, Bayesian, Griffith, and aVR algorithms, and the lead II R-wave-peak-time (RWPT) criterion. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively analysed 260 WCTs from 204 patients with proven diagnoses. The SN, SP, ACC, and likelihood ratios (LRs) were determined for the five methods. Of the 260 tracings, there were 159 VTs and 101 supraventricular tachycardias. All five methods were found to have a similar ACC although the RWPT had a lower ACC than the Brugada algorithm (68.8 vs. 77.5%, P = 0.04). The RWPT had lower (60%) SN than the Brugada (89.0%), Griffith (94.2%), and Bayesian (89%) algorithms (P < 0.001). The Griffith algorithm showed lower (39.8%) SP than the RWPT (82.7%), Brugada (59.2%), and Bayesian (52.0%) algorithms (P< 0.05). The positive LRs for a VT diagnosis for the RWPT criterion and the Brugada, Bayesian, aVR, and Griffith algorithms were 3.46, 2.18, 1.86, 1.67, and 1.56, respectively. CONCLUSION: The present study is the first independent 'head-to-head' comparison of several WCT differentiation methods. We found that all five algorithms/criteria had rather moderate ACC, and that the newer methods were not more accurate than the classic Brugada algorithm. However, the algorithms/criteria differed significantly in terms of SN, SP, and LR, suggesting that the value of a diagnosis may differ depending on the method used.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/europace/eus015

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jastrzebski, M., Kukla, P., Czarnecka, D., & Kawecka-Jaszcz, K.
Affiliations
Jagiellonian University (PL)
Venue
EP Europace
Published
2012-02-14
Volume
14
Issue
8
Pages
1165-1171
ISSN
  • 1099-5129 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2092
OpenAlex
W2145193031
Cited by
91
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • EP Europace (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
Keywords
wide QRS tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia, supraventricular tachycardia with aberrancy, Bayesian algorithm, electrocardiographic diagnosis, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity, likelihood ratios
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Bayes Theorem, Diagnosis, Differential, Electrocardiography, Female, Humans, Male, Retrospective Studies, Sensitivity and Specificity, Tachycardia

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