4.3 Article

Improved cardiovascular risk stratification by a simple ECG index in hypertension

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
Volume 16, Issue 8, Pages 646-652

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/S0895-7061(03)00912-9

Keywords

hypertension; ECG; echocardiography; hypertrophy; prognosis; blood pressure; epidemiology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: We determined the prognostic value of the Cornell/strain [C/S] index, a simple electrocardiographic (ECG) index for left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) defined by the presence of either a classic strain pattern or a Cornell voltage (sum of R in aVL + S in V-3) >2.0 mV in women or 2.4 mV in men, or both. Methods: In a prospective, cohort study, 2190 initially untreated subjects (age 51 [+/- 12], 47% women) with essential hypertension without prior events were followed for up to 14 years (median, 5 years). Results: Prevalence of LVH at entry was 16.3% by using the C/S index, which yielded 33.6% sensitivity and 91.0% specificity. Other ECG criteria for LVH including Sokolow-Lyon, Romhilt-Estes, Framingham, Cornell, and strain alone, achieved a lower sensitivity and prevalence. Over the subsequent follow-up, 244 patients experienced a first major cardiovascular event. Event rate (X 100 person-years) was 2.01 in those without and 4.44 in those with LVH by the C/S index (P < .001). After adjustment for age, sex, smoking, and other counfounders, the C/S index identified subjects at increased risk of events (relative risk 1.76; 95% confidence interval 1.32-2.33). The C/S index achieved the highest population-attributable risk (16.1%) for cardiovascular events. Conclusions: A simple ECG index that can be quickly measured from nondigital machines and without algorithms identifies LVH in a consistent proportion (16.3%) of hypertensive subjects. The LVH defined by such technique allows identification of individuals at high risk for cardiovascular events. (C) 2003 American Journal of Hypertension, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available