Korean Circulation Journal

The Korean Society of Cardiology (대한심장학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Comparison of Cornell and Sokolow-Lyon Electrocardiographic Criteria for Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Korean Patients

  • Park, Jin-Kyu (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Medical Center) ;
  • Shin, Jeong-Hun (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Seok-Hwan (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Guri Hospital) ;
  • Lim, Young-Hyo (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Kyung-Soo (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Soon-Gil (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Guri Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Jeong-Hyun (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Medical Center) ;
  • Lim, Heon-Gil (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Medical Center) ;
  • Shin, Jin-Ho (Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Medical Center)
  • Published : 2012.09.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Electrocardiography (ECG) is a cost-effective and useful method for diagnosing left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in a large-scale study or in clinical practice. Among ECG criteria, the Cornell product (Cor P) and Sokolow-Lyon criteria were adopted by the European Society of Hypertension-European Society of Cardiology Guidelines but have different performances among races. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of two voltage criteria in Korean patients. Subjects and Methods: Electrocardiography and echocardiographic LV mass of 332 (159 male, 173 female) consecutive patients were analyzed. Cornell voltage criteria and the Cor P were compared with Sokolow-Lyon voltage (Sok V) and the Sokolow-Lyon product (Sok P). The sensitivities and specificities were estimated using a receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curve in relation to the LVH diagnosis. The sensitivities and revised cut-off values were derived at specificity levels of 90, 95, and 100%. Results: The Cornell-based criteria generally showed better performance than that of the Sok V criteria and Sok P in the area under the ROC curve analysis. The revised cut-off values for the Cornell voltage criteria (20 and 16 mm for males and females, respectively) showed an improved sensitivity (19.7 and 30.3% for males and females, respectively), with a high specificity of 95%. Conclusion: The Cornell-based criteria had better performance than that of the Sokolow-Lyon criteria in both Korean men and women. However, revised cut-off values are needed to improve accuracy.

Keywords

References

  1. Bluemke DA, Kronmal RA, Lima JA, et al. The relationship of left ventricular mass and geometry to incident cardiovascular events: the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:2148-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2008.09.014
  2. Sundström J, Lind L, Arnlöv J, Zethelius B, Andrén B, Lithell HO. Echocardiographic and electrocardiographic diagnoses of left ventricular hypertrophy predict mortality independently of each other in a population of elderly men. Circulation 2001;103:2346-51. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.103.19.2346
  3. Hancock EW, Deal BJ, Mirvis DM, et al. AHA/ACCF/HRS recommendations for the standardization and interpretation of the electrocardiogram: part V: electrocardiogram changes associated with cardiac chamber hypertrophy: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Electrocardiography and Arrhythmias Committee, Council on Clinical Cardiology; the American College of Cardiology Foundation; and the Heart Rhythm Society. Endorsed by the International Society for Computerized Electrocardiology. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 53:992-1002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2008.12.015
  4. Molloy TJ, Okin PM, Devereux RB, Kligfield P. Electrocardiographic detection of left ventricular hypertrophy by the simple QRS voltage-duration product. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992;20:1180-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0735-1097(92)90376-X
  5. Truong QA, Ptaszek LM, Charipar EM, et al. Performance of electrocardiographic criteria for left ventricular hypertrophy as compared with cardiac computed tomography: from the Rule Out Myocardial Infarction Using Computer Assisted Tomography Trial. J Hypertens 2010;28: 1959-67. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e32833b49cb
  6. Rodrigues SL, D'Angelo L, Pereira AC, Krieger JE, Mill JG. Revision of the Sokolow-Lyon-Rappaport and cornell voltage criteria for left ventricular hypertrophy. Arq Bras Cardiol 2008;90:46-53. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0066-782X2008000100008
  7. Dahlof B, Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE, et al. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol. Lancet 2002;359:995-1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08089-3
  8. Okin PM, Devereux RB, Jern S, et al. Regression of electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy by losartan versus atenolol: the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint reduction in Hypertension (LIFE) Study. Circulation 2003;108:684-90. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000083724.28630.C3
  9. Mancia G, De Backer G, Dominiczak A, et al. 2007 guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: the Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). J Hypertens 2007;25:1105-87. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0b013e3281fc975a
  10. Okin PM, Wright JT, Nieminen MS, et al. Ethnic differences in electrocardiographic criteria for left ventricular hypertrophy: the LIFE Study. Losartan Intervention For Endpoint. Am J Hypertens 2002;15:663-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-7061(02)02945-X
  11. Sokolow M, Lyon TP. The ventricular complex in left ventricular hypertrophy as obtained by unipolar precordial and limb leads. Am Heart J 1949;37:161-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-8703(49)90562-1
  12. Casale PN, Devereux RB, Alonso DR, Campo E, Kligfield P. Improved sex-specific criteria of left ventricular hypertrophy for clinical and computer interpretation of electrocardiograms: validation with autopsy findings. Circulation 1987;75:565-72. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.75.3.565
  13. Alfakih K, Walters K, Jones T, Ridgway J, Hall AS, Sivananthan M. New gender-specific partition values for ECG criteria of left ventricular hypertrophy: recalibration against cardiac MRI. Hypertension 2004;44: 175-9. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.HYP.0000135249.66192.30
  14. Sahn DJ, DeMaria A, Kisslo J, Weyman A. Recommendations regarding quantitation in M-mode echocardiography: results of a survey of echocardiographic measurements. Circulation 1978;58:1072-83. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.58.6.1072
  15. Devereux RB, Alonso DR, Lutas EM, et al. Echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular hypertrophy: comparison to necropsy findings. Am J Cardiol 1986;57:450-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9149(86)90771-X
  16. De Simone G, Kizer JR, Chinali M, et al. Normalization for body size and population-attributable risk of left ventricular hypertrophy: the Strong Heart Study. Am J Hypertens 2005;18(2 Pt 1):191-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjhyper.2004.08.032
  17. Lang RM, Bierig M, Devereux RB, et al. Recommendations for chamber quantification: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography's Guidelines and Standards Committee and the Chamber Quantification Writing Group, developed in conjunction with the European Association of Echocardiography, a branch of the European Society of Cardiology. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2005;18:1440-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2005.10.005
  18. Hotelling H. The selection of variates for use in prediction with some comments on the general problem of nuisance parameters. Ann Math Statist 1940;11:271-83. https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177731867
  19. Pewsner D, Jüni P, Egger M, Battaglia M, Sundström J, Bachmann LM. Accuracy of electrocardiography in diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy in arterial hypertension: systematic review. BMJ 2007;335:711. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39276.636354.AE
  20. Pewsner D, Battaglia M, Minder C, Marx A, Bucher HC, Egger M. Ruling a diagnosis in or out with "SpPIn" and "SnNOut": a note of caution. BMJ 2004;329:209-13. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.329.7459.209
  21. Lee YW. Electrocardiographic diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy by scoring system. Korean Circ J 1977;7:1-8.
  22. Xie L, Wang Z. Correlation between echocardiographic left ventricular mass index and electrocardiographic variables used in left ventricular hypertrophy criteria in Chinese hypertensive patients. Hellenic J Cardiol 2010;51:391-401.
  23. Noble LM, Humphrey SB, Monaghan GB. Left ventricular hypertrophy in left bundle branch block. J Electrocardiol 1984;17:157-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0736(84)81090-0
  24. Okin PM, Devereux RB, Jern S, Kjeldsen SE, Julius S, Dahlöf B. Baseline characteristics in relation to electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients: the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint Reduction (LIFE) in Hypertension Study. The Life Study Investigators. Hypertension 2000;36:766-73. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.HYP.36.5.766
  25. Barrios V, Escobar C, Calderón A, et al. Gender differences in the diagnosis and treatment of left ventricular hypertrophy detected by different electrocardiographic criteria: findings from the SARA Study. Heart Vessels 2010;25:51-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00380-009-1154-1
  26. Hense HW, Gneiting B, Muscholl M, et al. The associations of body size and body composition with left ventricular mass: impacts for indexation in adults. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998;32:451-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(98)00240-X
  27. Schillaci G, Verdecchia P, Borgioni C, et al. Improved electrocardiographic diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy. Am J Cardiol 1994; 74:714-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9149(94)90316-6
  28. Devereux RB, Casale PN, Eisenberg RR, Miller DH, Kligfield P. Electrocardiographic detection of left ventricular hypertrophy using echocardiographic determination of left ventricular mass as the reference standard. Comparison of standard criteria, computer diagnosis and physician interpretation. J Am Coll Cardiol 1984;3:82-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(84)80433-7
  29. Casale PN, Devereux RB, Kligfield P, et al. Electrocardiographic detection of left ventricular hypertrophy: development and prospective validation of improved criteria. J Am Coll Cardiol 1985;6:572-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(85)80115-7
  30. Verdecchia P, Dovellini EV, Gorini M, et al. Comparison of electrocardiographic criteria for diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertension: the MAVI Study. Ital Heart J 2000;1:207-15.

Cited by

  1. The Accuracy of Electrocardiogram Criteria for Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Korean Cohort (Atherosclerosis Risk of a Rural Area Korean General Population) vol.19, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.5646/jksh.2013.19.4.112
  2. Levels of Cornell Voltage and Cornell Product for Predicting Cardiovascular and Stroke Mortality and Morbidity in the General Japanese Population vol.78, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.cj-13-0470
  3. Accuracy of the Electrocardiograph in Detecting Cardiac Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Pediatric Patients with Aortic Valve Disease vol.4, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.15406/jccr.2015.04.00129
  4. Gender-Adjustment and Cutoff Values of Cornell Product in Hypertensive Japanese Patients vol.58, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1536/ihj.16-573
  5. Comparison of the Performance of Three Commonly Used Electrocardiographic Indexes for the Diagnosis of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Black Hypertensive Patients with Reduced Kidney Function Managed vol.7, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.4236/wjcd.2017.74011
  6. Electrical Activity of the Heart Under Pressure vol.31, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpx175
  7. Additional prognostic value of electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy in traditional cardiovascular risk assessments in chronic kidney disease vol.38, pp.6, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002394
  8. Association of Cornell product with metabolic syndrome in middle-aged people in China vol.40, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13410-019-00771-w
  9. Prognostic value of myocardial injury-related findings on resting electrocardiography for cardiovascular risk in the asymptomatic general population: the 12-year follow-up report from the Ansan-Ansung vol.52, pp.5, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2020.1755052