English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

It is now well established that the vulnerability of the ventricular myocardium to repetitive dysrhythm increases in the presence of greater than normal disparity local recovery times. Local recovery is reflected in the electrocardiographic waveform as an area of the ventricular deflection (QRST time integral), and thus disparate ventricular recovery may be manifested in the body surface distribution of this quality. To assess this possibility, we obtained simultaneous 120-lead electrocardiograms from both the anterior and posterior torso in 140 subjects (ages 8 to 75) grouped as follows: group A, 97 normal subjects; group B, 16 patients resuscitated from ventricular fibrillation or sustained ventricular tachycardia; and group C, 27 patients 6 to 12 months after myocardial infarction but without clinically significant arrhythmia. In each subject, the QRST integral was evaluated for each lead and isointegral contour maps were plotted. A score was assigned to each map, based on the number of extrema; each maximum or minimum scored one point, with the exception of simultaneously occurring anterior and posterior minima on the right shoulder (frequently occurring in normal subjects), which scored together only one point. All but one group A subject had dipolar QRST integral maps (mean +/- SD score 2.11 +/- 0.2). Conversely, 10 of 16 (62.5%) group B patients had scores of 3 or more (mean 3.16 +/- 1.08; p less than .01 vs group A). Group C patients had intermediate values, with eight of 27 (29.6%) scoring 3 or more (mean 2.46 +/- 83); this was less than in group B (p less than .01), but more (p less than .05) than in group A.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Vulnerability to ventricular arrhythmia: assessment by mapping of body surface potential.