Mirvis D M
Cardiovasc Res. 1980 Jun;14(6):360-8. doi: 10.1093/cvr/14.6.360.
The ability of two methods of processing surface electrical potentials to detect nondipolar cardiac activity were compared. These were: 1) visual inspection of surface isopotential contours; and 2) quantitative determination of the cardiac equivalent generator properties of the sensed field using a single moving dipole construct. Data were derived from 26 isolated rabbit heart preparations contained within a spherical test chamber. Results demonstrated that: 1) overtly dipolar isopotential surface patterns were frequently associated with poor quantitative fit of surface potentials by the SMD, with up to 33.3% of recorded summed square (SSQ) potential remaining as nondipolar residual; 2) nondipolar surface patterns existed with as little as 6% of SSQ potential being unattributable to the SMD; and 3) the relationship between isopotential patterns and quantitated dipolarity varied significantly from animal to animal. Thus, these data suggest significant discrepancies between the methods that must be carefully considered when they are utilised to describe electrical field characteristcis.
比较了两种处理表面电势的方法检测非偶极心脏活动的能力。这两种方法是:1)表面等电势轮廓的目视检查;2)使用单个移动偶极结构对感测场的心脏等效发生器特性进行定量测定。数据来自置于球形测试腔中的26个离体兔心脏标本。结果表明:1)明显的偶极等电势表面模式常常与单移动偶极(SMD)对表面电势的定量拟合不佳相关,记录的平方和(SSQ)电势中高达33.3%的部分仍作为非偶极残差存在;2)存在非偶极表面模式,此时仅有6%的SSQ电势无法归因于SMD;3)等电势模式与定量偶极性之间的关系在不同动物之间有显著差异。因此,这些数据表明,在利用这些方法描述电场特征时,必须仔细考虑它们之间的显著差异。