Sunday, September 8, 2013

ECG Blog #75 — LAA vs LAE vs Not ...

The 12-lead ECG shown below in Figure-1 was obtained from a 27-year old man.
  • Does the patient have a large right atrium?
  • Any other abnormality?

Figure-1: ECG obtained from a 27-year old man. Is there RAE (Right Atrial Enlargement)? 



INTERPRETATION of Figure 1:
We interpret the ECG shown in Figure-1 as follows:
  • Sinus rhythm (upright P in lead II ) — with slight variation in R-R interval consistent with sinus arrhythmia. Intervals (PR/QRS/QT intervals) are normal. The axis is somewhat “vertical” — although still within normal range (positive in both leads I and aVF, although obviously much closer to aVF). We estimate that axis to be between +75-80 degrees.
  • RAA (Right Atrial Abnormality) — as P waves are tall and peaked in each of the inferior leads. The P wave in lead II is more than half a large box tall (>2.5mm). Otherwise — No evidence of chamber enlargement.
  • QRST Changes: There are small, narrow q waves in multiple leads (seen in leads II,III,aVF; and V3,V4,V5,V6). Transition occurs normally between leads V2-to-V3. There is shallow T wave inversion in lead aVL — but otherwise no acute changes.
IMPRESSION: Sinus arrhythmia. RAA. Small q waves in multiple leads. Otherwise unremarkable ECG for a 27-year old man. We make the following comments:
  • The obvious first question is WHY did this 27-year old man have an ECG done in the first place? We are not told if the patient was otherwise healthy and required to have an ECG as part of a pre-insurance exam or some other screening procedure — vs chief complaint of acute or longterm shortness of breath.
  • Sinus arrhythmia as seen in Figure-1 is a normal variant in a young adult.
  • The ECG presence of “RAA” is not necessarily indication of right atrial “enlargement”. It is not necessarily an abnormal finding in a young adult with a relatively vertical axis (See below).
  • Although QRS voltage initially looks to be “increased” — criteria for LVH (Left Ventricular Hypertrophy) are not satisfied because the patient is 27 years old. As discussed in ECG Blog #73 — QRS amplitude is often increased in younger adults without this necessarily reflecting true chamber enlargement. Thus although sum of deepest S in V1,V2 + tallest R in V5,V6 in Figure-1 clearly exceeds 35mm — this does not qualify as “voltage for LVH” since this patient is less than 35 years of age (See Figure-2 in ECG Blog #73).
  • The shallow, symmetric T wave inversion in lead aVL is not abnormal as an isolated finding. Isolated T wave inversion may be normal in one or more of the following leads: III, aVR, aVL, aVF and lead V1 (See Figure 4 in ECG Blog #9). The isolated T inversion in lead aVL seen here in Figure-1 is especially likely to be a normal finding given that the QRS complex is predominantly negative in this lead (T wave axis often follows close behind QRS axis).
  • Small q waves are seen in multiple leads in Figure-1. Small lateral q waves are commonly seen in one or more lateral leads (leads I,aVL; V4,V5,V6). When no other abnormality is present — these are termed, normal septal q waves. They simply reflect that the ventricular septum is normally activated from left-to-right — such that lateral leads see the initial ventricular depolarization vector as moving away from the left (thereby writing a small, narrow initial deflection in one or more of the lateral leads). While a q wave is not usually seen as far anteriorly as lead V3 (as it is in Figure-1) — this probably reflects the relatively tall R wave that is seen in lead V3 in Figure-1. It is therefore not necessarily abnormal. Finally — normal septal q waves may occasionally be seen in inferior leads in otherwise healthy individuals who manifest a relatively vertical axis. Bottom Line: — The presence of multiple small and narrow q waves is not necessarily an abnormal finding for a 27-year old man with a relatively vertical QRS axis and no acute ST-T wave changes.
Clinical Impression: In the absence of any history or physical exam findings to suggest otherwise — the ECG in Figure-1 may well turn out to be of no particular concern.


------------------------------------------
ATRIAL ENLARGEMENT: How is it Detected on ECG?
We devote the rest of our discussion to exploring the issue of ECG assessment for atrial enlargement. The point to emphasize is that the ECG is neither sensitive nor specific in assessing for atrial enlargement. If you really need to know about atrial dimensions — Echo is far more accurate. That said — there are times when the ECG may provide important clues which clinically are very helpful.
  • Recognition of LAA (Left Atrial Abnormality) — may support the ECG diagnosis of LVH.
  • This is especially true when underlying bundle branch block is present.
  • Recognition of RAA (Right Atrial Abnormality) in association with other ECG signs — may strongly suggest RVH (and/or pulmonary hypertension). It may also suggest acute pulmonary embolus.
  • ECG signs of multichamber enlargement (at least LVH, LAA, RAA — and possibly also RVH) in a patient with underlying heart disease suggests cardiomyopathy.
ECG Recognition: The 2 leads to use to assess for atrial enlargement are leads II and V1. Normal and abnormal findings for sinus rhythm (NSR), RAA and LAA are summarized for these 2 leads in Figure-2:
  • Note that with NSR (Normal Sinus Rhythm) — the P is upright in lead II and may be upright, negative or biphasic in lead V1.
  • With RAA — the P wave is tall (≥2.5 mm) and pointed in lead II.
  • With LAA — the P is either notched in lead II and/or there is a deep negative component to the P in lead V1.

Figure-2: ECG signs of atrial enlargement. 


------------------------------------------
Physiologic Rationale: The physiologic rationale for ECG signs of atrial enlargement is based on: i) anatomic location of lead V1 (the V1 electrode lies over the RA = right atrium) — and — ii) relative direction of RA and LA depolarization with respect to the SA node (Figure-3).
  • With NSR (Normal Sinus Rhythm) — the impulse begins in the SA Node — which lies in the upper part of the right atrium (Panel A in Figure-3). Activation of the RA will therefore be seen as approaching lead V1 — whereas activation of the LA will be seen as moving away from lead V1 (red arrows in Panel B). This explains why in theory — the P wave in lead V1 should normally be biphasic, with an initial positive component (as the RA is depolarized) — followed by a negative component (as the LA is depolarized). In Practice — the P wave in lead V1 may normally be positive, negative or biphasic (See NSR in Figure-2 above).
  • The reason the P wave is normally upright in lead II with sinus rhythm is shown in Panel C of Figure-3. Summation of RA and LA activation is seen as moving toward lead II at +60 degrees (arrows in Panel C).

Figure-3: Physiologic basis for why with NSR (Normal Sinus Rhythm) — the P in V1 may be positive, negative or biphasic (Panel B) — and why the P wave in lead II is upright (Panel C).



------------------------------------------
ECG Criteria: The Normal P Wave in Leads II, V1
Appreciation of concepts illustrated in Figure-3 facilitates understanding the ECG signs of atrial enlargement shown in Figure-2:
  • With NSR (Normal Sinus Rhythm) — the P wave in lead V1 may normally be upright, negative or biphasic.
  • The finding of a negative P wave in lead V1 is therefore not abnormal.
  • NOTE: Be aware that minor deviation from correct lead placement may alter P wave appearance in V1. Despite best intentions — precordial lead misplacement is relatively common. For example, positioning leads V1 and V2 too high (by 1 or 2 interspaces) on the chest — may result in prominent P wave negativity, that in lead V1 might falsely suggest LAA (Please see My Comment at the bottom of the page on Dr. Smith's Nov. 4, 2018 ECG Blog — for 3 Clues to quickly recognize malposition of electrode leads V1 and V2).

RAA: ECG Criteria (See Figure-2)
  • RAA (Right Atrial Abnormality) — is diagnosed by the finding of tall Peaked and Pointed P waves in the Pulmonary leads. Because patients with COPD often have low diaphragms (and therefore an inferior axis) — we think of the inferior leads (II,III,aVF) as the "pulmonary" leads.
  • The P wave should be at least half a large box tall (=2.5mm) — in at least one of the inferior leads to satisfy criteria for RAA.
  • IF the P looks "uncomfortable to sit on" — Think RAA! = P Pulmonale.
  • Lead V1 is usually not helpful in the ECG diagnosis of RAA. That said — on occasion you may see relatively pointed P waves (not necessarily half a large box tall) in lead V1 — that strongly suggests RAA.

LAA: ECG Criteria (See Figure-2)
  • LAA (Left Atrial Abnormality) — is diagnosed by finding an m‑shaped (notched) and widened P wave (≥0.12 second) in a "mitral" lead (I,II,aVL) — and/or a deep negative component to the P in lead V1 = P Mitrale.
  • The reason the P wave becomes wider with LAA is that the left atrium is activated after the right atrium (since the SA Node is in the RA). It is addition of this LA component to the P wave that produces the notch/extra ‘hump’ to form the “M” in lead II.
  • The best ECG sign of LAA is the finding of a deep, negative component to the P in lead V1 — that is at least 1 little box deep or wide.
  • We generally undercall  LAA  because of the poor  specificity  the ECG has for atrial enlargement.

------------------------------------------
Terminology: — Enlargement vs Abnormality?
Many clinicians use LAA/RAA — and RAE/LAE interchangeably. We prefer the terms, “LAA” and “RAA” (where the “A” stands for Abnormality) in acknowledgement that an abnormal-looking P wave on ECG does not always mean true atrial chamber “Enlargement”. It simply means a different-than-usual P wave appearance.
  • Other reasons for abnormal P waves include body habitus (tall, peaked P waves may be seen in slender individuals with a vertical axis); increased atrial pressure (ie, from heart failure) and atrial conduction defects.
  • Clinical context will usually suggest whether RAA/LAA is likely to reflect true atrial “enlargement” — or something else. IF we know true atrial chamber enlargement is likely (because of marked LVH or RVH on ECG in a patient with underlying heart disease) — then we may switch to the LA“E” or RA“E” designation. Otherwise — we generally prefer to use the terms LA“A” or RA“A”.
  • NOTE-1: The atrial don’t “hypertrophy” in that their walls don’t thicken. Instead — the atria enlarge (dilate).
  • NOTE-2: Some of the most abnormal looking P waves (with notching in multiple leads) is seen when there are intra-atrial conduction defects. We suspect this (rather than atrial enlargement) whenever notching and unusual P wave morphology is present in multiple leads ...
------------------------------------------
CAVEAT (Beyond-the-Core): In keeping with the clinical reality that ECG is neither sensitive nor specific for true atrial chamber enlargement — a phenomenon that I have observed on occasion is that increased atrial pressure (as is commonly seen with acute heart failure) may transiently result in increased P wave amplitude that simulates RAA and/or LAA — but which then resolves within 1-2 days after the patient is treated.


------------------------------------------
Bottom Line: — Returning to the original case presented of the 27-year old man whose ECG was shown in Figure-1 — the chances are better than not that the tall, peaked and pointed P waves seen in the inferior leads do not represent true atrial chamber enlargement. We say this because of: i) the patient’s age; ii) the relatively vertical QRS axis; and, iii) the lack of other abnormality on the tracing. That said — knowledge of the clinical history and physical exam findings (heart murmur?) would be needed to better assess this.
  • Preferential use of the term “RAA” instead of “RAE” — allows us to acknowledge funny-looking P wave on ECG without need to necessarily attribute this to any cardiac pathology in this 27-year old man who might end up having a normal heart.

-------------------------------------
- For more information — GO TO:






Tuesday, September 3, 2013

ECG Interpretation Review #74 (Computerized ECG Interpretation – Peaked T Waves – QS complexes - Computer)


The 12-lead ECG shown below in Figure-1 was obtained from a 78-year old woman who presented with atypical chest pain. The computer interpretation was: Sinus rhythm; left axis (-10 degrees) — but otherwise “normal” ECG.
  • Do you agree with the computerized interpretation?
  • Do you usually or “never” agree with the computerized interpretation? Do you use the computer at all?

Figure-1: 12-lead ECG obtained from a 78-year old woman with atypical chest pain. Do you agree with the computer interpretation? 


------------------------------------------
INTERPRETATION of Figure 1:
This example highlights the importance of overreading the computerized interpretation. This is not a "normal" ECG:
  • There is normal sinus rhythm at a rate of ~85/minute. Intervals (PR/QRS/QT intervals) are normal.
  • There is LAD (Left Axis Deviation) with an estimated axis of -10 degrees — but the axis is not leftward enough to satisfy criteria for LAHB (Left Anterior HemiBlock), since the QRS is positive in lead II (ie, the axis is not more negative than -30 degrees).
  • No chamber enlargement.
  • QRST Changes: There are QS complexes in leads V1,V2. A small but definite r wave is seen in lead V3. Transition is slightly delayed (the R becomes taller than the S is deep between V4-to-V5). There is shallow T inversion in lead III. Perhaps the most remarkable finding is the presence of abnormally peaked T waves in leads V1-thru-V4. The T wave in V2 is quite tall.

IMPRESSION: Clinical correlation is needed to determine the significance of these findings:
  • The QS complex in leads V1,V2 could indicate septal infarction of uncertain age. Notching on the downslope of the QS complex in lead V2 supports this supposition – but the presence of a definite r wave by lead V3 means that we cannot be certain if this pattern represents prior septal infarction — lead placement error — or anatomic variant.
  • Note was made of the shallow, symmetric T inversion in lead III. Although this could be ischemic — isolated T wave inversion in either lead III and/or lead aVF may at times be a normal finding. This is especially true when the QRS complex with the T inversion is predominantly negative (as seen here) and T inversion is absent in the other inferior leads (leads II, aVF).
  • The tall, peaked T waves with narrow base in a number of precordial leads clearly suggests hyperkalemia. That said — serum potassium in this patient was normal! Another cause of abnormally peaked T waves is ischemia (IF we perform a “mirror test” by inverting the tracing, the reciprocal of tall, peaked anterior T waves — is deep symmetric T inversion in what corresponds to the posterior lead distribution).
  • BOTTOM LINE: It turned out that this ECG was absolutely unchanged from prior tracings done on this patient. Given that serum potassium was normal — our interpretation was: “Sinus rhythm; possible old septal infarction; peaked precordial T waves suggestive of ischemia — but no acute change compared to prior tracings.” That said — the computerized interpretation clearly failed to recognize several abnormal findings ...


Computerized ECG Interpretations: Friend or Foe
A frequent question that arises is, “How best to use (or not use) the computerized ECG interpretation?” Opinions vary. We feel the answer depends on the goals and experience level of the interpreter.
  • Computerized ECG analysis systems are not infallible. They are far from perfect at ECG interpretation. Our task is to appreciate what computer systems do well — and what they do not do well.

At the current time — virtually all modern ECG machines automatically provide a computerized interpretation. This has benefits and drawbacks. Consider the following:
  • Computerized systems excel at computing values. That’s what computers do. As a result — computerized systems are extremely accurate in calculating: i) Rate; ii) Intervals (PR/QRS/QT); and iii) Axis.
  • They are usually reliable in recognizing sinus rhythm mechanisms and normal tracings.
  • For the Expert Interpreter — the most advantageous feature of computerized systems is saving time! There is no longer need to calculate rate, intervals or axis — since the computer instantly provides legible and accurate printout of these values. IF the computer says, “Normal ECG” — it may literally take no more than 2-3 seconds for an experienced interpreter to overread and sign the report (provided they agree with the interpretation).
  • For the Non-Expert Interpreter — the major benefit of computerized systems is the backup opinion the system provides. The computer may suggest findings not initially thought of by a less experienced interpreter. This encourages more careful, targeted review of the tracing. It may also be educational by the suggestions it makes. Finally — confidence may be boosted when computer analysis agrees with the clinician’s interpretation.
  • NOTE: The computer backup opinion may help the expert-in-a-hurry from overlooking any ECG findings.

CAVEATS: Computerized systems do not do as well in evaluation of abnormal tracings as they do with normal or relatively normal tracings (especially when complex abnormalities are present ).
  • They are far less accurate interpreting rhythms that do not have a sinus mechanism.
  • They may miss subtle infarctions ...
  • They tend to overinterpret the J-point ST elevation that is commonly seen with early repolarization patterns (at times mislabeling these normal variants as “acute MI”).
  • They may miss pacemaker spikes / WPW / tall R in V1.


Suggested Approach: How to Use the Computer
Expertise of the interpreter dictates the approach:
  • For the Non-Expert Interpreter — Do not initially read the computer report (because you do not want to bias your interpretation by what the computer says). Instead — WRITE OUT (or at least think out) your interpretation before you look at the computer readout. Check findings you note with each computer statement. Then delete, modify and/or add to the computer interpretation as needed. Admittedly — it will take a little longer to interpret ECGs in this manner — but given the limited number of tracings most non-expert interpreters must assess, time-saving is far less important than optimizing accuracy. Checking your interpretation with what the computer says may suggest findings not initially thought of — as well as forcing you to relook at any questionable findings. This increases accuracy.
  • For the Expert Interpreter — Review the computer report either before or after evaluation of the ECG itself. Minimize time devoted to determination of heart rate, intervals and axis (since the computer is very accurate for these parameters). Consider more careful evaluation IF the rhythm is not sinus — or IF the ECG is interpreted by the computer as abnormal. Overread each computer statement. Place a check mark next to those that are accurate. Delete, modify or add to incorrect statements. Optimal speed is attained by quick overview of the tracing in conjunction with review of the computer report. Normal ECGs should literally take the expert no more than 2-3 seconds to complete. Awareness of computer strengths and weaknesses in interpretation allows the expert to quickly determine when the computer report should be partially or completely ignored.
  • For any Interpreter — If you disagree with one or more computer statements — cross these out! The computer reading is part of the medical record — so incorrect statements should not stand unmarked.

------------------------------------------
Editorial Comment by the Author:  Prior to researching this topic (references of my work below) — I thought computerized interpretations were a waste of time. However, once I learned to appreciate their benefits and drawbacks — I learned to love computerized interpretations. They literally tripled my speed of interpretation — especially when sinus rhythm and minimal abnormalities are present. On the other hand — I ignore what the computer says when the rhythm is anything other than sinus. I’m fully aware of the need to carefully overread early repolarization patterns and tracings on patients with chest pain. Finally — I’ve observed that when less experienced interpreters truly make an honest attempt to interpret the ECG first before they look at what the computer says — that accuracy is increased.
-------------------------------------

- For more information — GO TO:

  • See this pdf on Computerized ECG Interpretations excerpted from Section 13.0 (in ECG-2014-ePub).
Our Publications on Computerized ECG Interpretation include the following:
  • Grauer K: Chapter 21 — Does the Computer Know Better? – from Grauer K: Practical Guide to ECG Interpretation (2nd Edition) – Mosby, St. Louis, 1998, pp 374-379.
  • Grauer K, Kravitz L, Ariet M, Curry RW, Nelson WP, Marriott HJL: Potential Benefits of a Computer ECG Interpretation System for Primary Care Physicians in a Community Hospital. J Am Bd Fam Prac 1:17-24, 1989.
  • Grauer K, Kravitz L, Curry RW, Ariet M: Computerized Electrocardiogram Interpretations: Are They Useful for the Family Physician? J Fam Prac 24:39-43, 1987.
  • Grauer K, Curry RW: Chapter 11: Use of Computerized ECG Interpretation Programs. - from Clinical Electrocardiography (Grauer & Curry) — Blackwell Scientific Publications, Boston, 1992, pp 418-425.
-------------------------------------