Tuna N, Finkelstein S, Biessener W, Jelatis G, Tiller M
J Electrocardiol. 1980;13(3):219-26. doi: 10.1016/s0022-0736(80)80024-0.
The Frank and the SVEC III lead systems were used to record the vectorcardiograms (VCGs) of 10 normal subjects. The VCGs obtained using the two leads were compared. The QRS and the T magnitudes of the Frank lead were 25-30% and 13%, respectively, larger than those of the SVEC III. The maximum QRS vectors of the Frank lead were less inferiorly and less posteriorly oriented. Maximal T vectors of the Frank lead were less inferiorly and less anteriorly oriented. When the VCGs of 318 adult male Minnesotans (Minnesota group) recorded by the SVEC III lead system were compared with the VCGs of 510 adults from Washington, D.C. (Draper group) recorded by the Frank system, the magnitudes of QRS and T of the Draper group were larger. The percent increase of voltage was comparable to that seen when the two leads were compared in the same population. There were angular differences between the Draper and the Minnesota groups which could not be explained by lead differences. The differences were attributed to the differences in populations. It was also noted that there are significant differences in the normal values published by various authors and that the normal values obtained from one population should be applied with caution to other populations.
使用弗兰克导联系统和SVEC III导联系统记录了10名正常受试者的心电图（VCG）。比较了使用这两种导联获得的VCG。弗兰克导联的QRS波群和T波幅度分别比SVEC III导联大25%-30%和13%。弗兰克导联的最大QRS向量向下和向后的指向较少。弗兰克导联的最大T向量向下和向前的指向较少。当比较由SVEC III导联系统记录的318名成年男性明尼苏达人（明尼苏达组）的VCG与由弗兰克系统记录的510名来自华盛顿特区的成年人（德雷珀组）的VCG时，德雷珀组的QRS波群和T波幅度更大。电压增加的百分比与在同一人群中比较这两种导联时观察到的情况相当。德雷珀组和明尼苏达组之间存在角度差异，这无法用导联差异来解释。这些差异归因于人群差异。还注意到不同作者公布的正常值存在显著差异，并且从一个人群获得的正常值应用于其他人群时应谨慎。
