Oeff M, von Leitner E R, Sthapit R, Breithardt G, Borggrefe M, Karbenn U, Meinertz T, Zotz R, Clas W, Hombach V
Eur Heart J. 1986 Jan;7(1):25-33. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a061953.
To evaluate the methodological problems of the non-invasive registration of late potentials the results obtained with four different averaging devices in the same 109 patients were compared. The high-resolution ECG was obtained from the body surface, high-gain amplified and filtered. With the averaging technique, the improved signal-to-noise ratio was able to detect low-amplitude cardiac activity. The incidence of late potentials detected with the four averaging systems, whose characteristics are described, ranged between 12% and 21%. Corresponding positive results were obtained in 5.5%, corresponding negative results in 68.8%. The reasons for differing results were mainly due to differences in visual or automatic interpretation of the registered fractionated electrical cardiac activity. Additionally, the determination of the end of QRS using the QRS width, obtained from reference leads, may influence the specificity of the methods.
为评估晚期电位无创记录的方法学问题，对在同一109例患者中使用四种不同平均装置获得的结果进行了比较。高分辨率心电图是从体表获取的，经过高增益放大和滤波。采用平均技术，提高的信噪比能够检测到低幅度心脏活动。所描述的四种平均系统检测到的晚期电位发生率在12%至21%之间。相应的阳性结果为5.5%，相应的阴性结果为68.8%。结果不同的原因主要是由于对记录的心脏碎裂电活动进行视觉或自动解读存在差异。此外，使用从参考导联获得的QRS宽度来确定QRS终点可能会影响这些方法的特异性。
