Automated Electrocardiograph ST Segment Trending Monitors: Accuracy in Detecting Myocardial Ischemia

Continuous automated ST segment trending devices (ST trending monitors) are included in most new operating room electrocardiography (ECG) monitors to facilitate ischemia detection, but their efficacy is not well validated.Therefore, we compared their accuracy with that of Holter ECG recorders in detecting ST segment changes (both analyzed offline) in 94 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Holter ECG tapes were analyzed using standard criteria for determining ECG ischemic episodes, which were compared with those measured by the ST trending monitors. Overall, 42 ischemic episodes were detected by using the Holter monitor in 30 patients. Of the 42 episodes, 38 (90%) were also detected by the ST trending monitors. Sixteen episodes of ST segment deviation were detected by the ST trending monitors, but not by the Holter. The sensitivity of the three ST trending monitors in detecting ischemia was 75%, 78%, and 60% for the Marquette (Milwaukee, WI), Hewlett Packard (Andover, MA), and Datex (Helsinki, Finland) monitors, respectively, with a specificity of 89%, 71%, and 69% relative to the Holter. Compared with the HP and Datex monitors, the Marquette monitor has the best agreement with the Holter (K 0.64). Conditions in which ST trending monitors may be inaccurate were identified and included the appearance of small R-wave amplitude, drifting baseline, and during periods of conduction abnormalities and pacing. We conclude that ST trending monitors have only moderate sensitivity and specificity (<75% overall) in accurately detecting ECG ST segment changes compared with Holter ECG recordings. Therefore, sole reliance on ST trending monitors for the detection of myocardial ischemia may be insufficient. Implications: Using Holter recordings as the reference standard for detection of intraoperative ischemia, ST trending monitors were found to have overall sensitivity and specificity of 74% and 73%, respectively. Several conditions contribute to the inaccuracy of ST trend monitoring, and additional modification of their performance is necessary to achieve better agreement with the Holter analysis. (Anesth Analg 1998;87:4-10)

[1]  W. Browner,et al.  Prognostic importance of postbypass regional wall-motion abnormalities in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery. SPI Research Group. , 1989, Anesthesiology.

[2]  J. Cowan,et al.  Comparison of unipolar and bipolar ventricular paced evoked responses , 1992, British heart journal.

[3]  B. Everitt,et al.  Statistical methods for rates and proportions , 1973 .

[4]  C. Jaffe,et al.  Regional myocardial dysfunction during coronary angioplasty: evaluation by two-dimensional echocardiography and 12 lead electrocardiography. , 1986, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  G. Diamond,et al.  Comparison of hemodynamic, electrocardiographic, mechanical, and metabolic indicators of intraoperative myocardial ischemia in vascular surgical patients with coronary artery disease. , 1989, Anesthesiology.

[6]  B. Chaitman,et al.  Comparative sensitivity and specificity of exercise electrocardiographic lead systems. , 1981, The American journal of cardiology.

[7]  M F Roizen,et al.  Intraoperative detection of myocardial ischemia in high-risk patients: electrocardiography versus two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography. , 1985, Circulation.

[8]  I. Rubin,et al.  Dangers in interpreting the electrocardiogram from the oscilloscope monitor. , 1970, JAMA.

[9]  J. Ross,et al.  Dissociation Between Regional Myocardial Dysfunction and ECG Changes During Ischemia in the Conscious Dog , 1980, Circulation.

[10]  H V Pipberger,et al.  The low-frequency response of electrocardiographs, a frequent source of recording errors. , 1966, American heart journal.

[11]  M. Krucoff,et al.  Quantitative and qualitative ST segment monitoring during and after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. , 1990, Circulation.

[12]  L. Way,et al.  Monitoring for Myocardial Ischemia During Noncardiac Surgery: A Technology Assessment of Transesophageal Echocardiography and 12-Lead Electrocardiography , 1992 .

[13]  J. Kampine,et al.  Intraoperative detection of myocardial ischemia with an ST segment trend monitoring system. , 1984, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[14]  W. Browner,et al.  The "natural history" of segmental wall motion abnormalities in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. S.P.I. Research Group. , 1990, Anesthesiology.

[15]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[16]  M. London,et al.  Validation testing of the spacelabs PC2 ST-segment analyzer. , 1995, Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia.

[17]  S. Feinstein,et al.  A Comparison of Methods for the Detection of Myocardial Ischemia During Noncardiac Surgery: Automated ST‐Segment Analysis Systems, Electrocardiography, and Transesophageal Echocardiography , 1992, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[18]  R. M. Griffin,et al.  Myocardial ischaemia during non-cardiac surgery. A comparison of different lead systems using computerised ST segment analysis. , 1987, Anaesthesia.

[19]  C Michelassi,et al.  Unreliability of conventional visual electrocardiographic monitoring for detection of transient ST segment changes in a coronary care unit. , 1984, European heart journal.

[20]  G. Timmis,et al.  Sequence of mechanical, electrocardiographic and clinical effects of repeated coronary artery occlusion in human beings: echocardiographic observations during coronary angioplasty. , 1985, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[21]  A. Keats,et al.  Incidence of perioperative myocardial ischemia detected by different electrocardiographic systems. , 1990, Anesthesiology.

[22]  M. Matsuda,et al.  Dissociation between regional myocardial dysfunction and ECG changes during myocardial ischemia induced by exercise in patients with angina pectoris. , 1983, American heart journal.