Cermakova Eva, Piskovska Anna, Trhonova Veronika, Schilliger Lionel, Knotek Zdenek
Avian and Exotic Animal Clinic, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Veterinary and Pharmaceutical Sciences Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Private Veterinarian, Nové Veselí, Czech Republic.
Vet Med (Praha). 2021 Feb 28;66(2):66-71. doi: 10.17221/39/2020-VETMED. eCollection 2021 Feb.
The aim of the study was to compare the heart rate, QRS interval, and R wave amplitude across three electrocardiogram models, and assess the ability of each of them to provide electrocardiograms (ECG) for clinical interpretation. The three electrocardiogram models included ECG Seiva Praktik Veterinary, CardioStore ECG and AliveCor Veterinary Heart Monitor. The data were collected from twelve healthy adult captive green iguanas () monitored under a manual restraint at a room temperature of 22.6-28.0 °C. The ECGs using the Seiva Praktik and CardioStore ECG veterinary electrocardiography were performed with standard 4 lead ECG recordings. The AliveCor Veterinary Heart Monitor was placed (with the use of gel) directly on the lateral body wall. The mean heart rate was 42 ± 8 beats/min (CardioStore), 50 ± 11 beats/min (Seiva Praktik Veterinary), and 51 ± 9 beats/min (AliveCor Veterinary Heart Monitor). No significant difference in the heart rate was observed. A significant difference ( < 0.05) in the QRS duration was observed between the CardioStore and AliveCor Veterinary Heart Monitor. Significant differences ( < 0.01) in the R wave amplitude were detected between the CardioStore and AliveCor Veterinary Heart Monitor and between the Seiva Praktik Veterinary and AliveCor Veterinary Heart Monitor. The ECGs produced by the Seiva Praktik VVeeterinary and CardioStore machines were interpretable at 100%, while those produced by the AliveCor Veterinary Heart Monitor were interpretable at 66%. Seiva Praktik Veterinary is most appropriately used as an anaesthesia monitoring tool. AliveCor Veterinary Heart Monitor could be used as an additional diagnostic tool, but the results should be ideally confirmed with a standard ECG machine. Seiva Praktik Veterinary is the most appropriate tool for monitoring the ECG within the anaesthesia, while CardioStore might be most appropriately used as an advanced diagnostic tool by virtue of its software assistance. The ECGs obtained with AliveCor Veterinary Heart Monitor should be confirmed using a standard ECG machine.
本研究的目的是比较三种心电图模型的心率、QRS间期和R波振幅,并评估它们各自提供心电图(ECG)以供临床解读的能力。这三种心电图模型包括Seiva Praktik Veterinary心电图、CardioStore心电图和AliveCor Veterinary心脏监测仪。数据收集自12只健康的成年圈养绿鬣蜥,在室温22.6 - 28.0°C下手动约束状态下进行监测。使用Seiva Praktik和CardioStore心电图兽医心电图仪进行的心电图检查采用标准的4导联心电图记录。AliveCor Veterinary心脏监测仪(使用凝胶)直接放置在身体侧壁。平均心率为42±8次/分钟(CardioStore)、50±11次/分钟(Seiva Praktik Veterinary)和51±9次/分钟(AliveCor Veterinary心脏监测仪)。未观察到心率有显著差异。在CardioStore和AliveCor Veterinary心脏监测仪之间观察到QRS时限有显著差异(P<0.05)。在CardioStore和AliveCor Veterinary心脏监测仪之间以及Seiva Praktik Veterinary和AliveCor Veterinary心脏监测仪之间检测到R波振幅有显著差异(P<0.01)。Seiva Praktik Veterinary和CardioStore机器产生的心电图可解读率为100%,而AliveCor Veterinary心脏监测仪产生的心电图可解读率为66%。Seiva Praktik Veterinary最适合用作麻醉监测工具。AliveCor Veterinary心脏监测仪可用作辅助诊断工具,但理想情况下结果应由标准心电图机确认。Seiva Praktik Veterinary是麻醉期间监测心电图的最合适工具,而CardioStore由于其软件辅助可能最适合用作高级诊断工具。使用AliveCor Veterinary心脏监测仪获得的心电图应使用标准心电图机进行确认。