INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES:In the absence of right ventricular hypertrophy or bundle-branch block, a prominent R wave in V(1) or V(2) is considered to reflect a lateral myocardial infarction. We investigated the differences in infarct location, size and transmural extent between patients with prominent R wave in V(1) and those with prominent R wave in V(2). METHODS: We studied 50 patients with a previous first infarction involving left ventricular inferior and/or lateral wall at contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance. RESULTS: A prominent R wave in V(1) was present in 8 patients (16%), in V(2) in 23 (46%). At magnetic resonance, the infarction involved the inferior wall in 11 patients (22%), the lateral wall in 6 (12%), and both walls in 33 patients (66%). The sensitivity of a prominent R wave in V(1) in detecting a lateral infarction was low (17.9%), while the specificity was high (90.9%). The sensitivity and specificity of a prominent R wave in V(2) were 46.2% and 54.5%, respectively. In patients with a prominent R wave in V(1), infarct size and lateral and transmural extent were greater than in patients without this pattern (P<.005, <.001, and <.05, respectively); conversely, infarct size and transmural extent in the inferior wall and in its basal-posterior segment were not significantly different. In patients with a prominent R wave in V(2), infarct size, lateral and transmural extent were not different from patients without this pattern. CONCLUSIONS: Only a prominent R wave in V(1) is a specific sign of large and transmural lateral infarction.

A Prominent R Wave in V(1) but not in V(2) Is a Specific Sign of a Large Lateral Transmural Infarction

DI BELLA, Gianluca;
2012-01-01

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES:In the absence of right ventricular hypertrophy or bundle-branch block, a prominent R wave in V(1) or V(2) is considered to reflect a lateral myocardial infarction. We investigated the differences in infarct location, size and transmural extent between patients with prominent R wave in V(1) and those with prominent R wave in V(2). METHODS: We studied 50 patients with a previous first infarction involving left ventricular inferior and/or lateral wall at contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance. RESULTS: A prominent R wave in V(1) was present in 8 patients (16%), in V(2) in 23 (46%). At magnetic resonance, the infarction involved the inferior wall in 11 patients (22%), the lateral wall in 6 (12%), and both walls in 33 patients (66%). The sensitivity of a prominent R wave in V(1) in detecting a lateral infarction was low (17.9%), while the specificity was high (90.9%). The sensitivity and specificity of a prominent R wave in V(2) were 46.2% and 54.5%, respectively. In patients with a prominent R wave in V(1), infarct size and lateral and transmural extent were greater than in patients without this pattern (P<.005, <.001, and <.05, respectively); conversely, infarct size and transmural extent in the inferior wall and in its basal-posterior segment were not significantly different. In patients with a prominent R wave in V(2), infarct size, lateral and transmural extent were not different from patients without this pattern. CONCLUSIONS: Only a prominent R wave in V(1) is a specific sign of large and transmural lateral infarction.
2012
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11570/2374421
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 7
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 6
social impact