头胸导联和常规导联对右心室肥大诊断价值对比分析

Contrastive Analysis on the Head-chest Leads and Wilson Leads of Electrocardiogram for Diagnosing the Right Ventricular Hypertension

目的：比较头胸（HC）导联和常规（Wilson）导联对右心室肥大的诊断价值。方法：选取46例在我院同时行超声心动图和心电图检查的患者，依据超声心动图对心室大小的测量，并结合X线胸片及手术结果，分为右室肥大组23例（其中单纯右室肥大组14例，双室肥大组7例）和右室正常组23例，对其常规12导联和头胸导联心电图对应导联进行测量分析，计算各电压标准诊断右室肥大的敏感性、特异性、准确性，并比较各导联心电图波形的差异。结果：各项指标诊断右室肥大的特异性均〉70％，但敏感性较低，且差异较大。结论：头胸导联对右室肥大的诊断价值优于常规导联，AR3导联是诊断右室肥大的较好指标。

Objective To compare the clinical value of the head-chest leads and Wilson leads of Electrocardiogram （ECG） for diagnosing RVH. Methods Synchronous ECG of the two leads systems were studied in 46 patients who were divided into RVH group and normal right ventricular group by UCG. each group had 23 patients, and the RVH group included 14 patients who had only RVH and 7 patients who had both ventricular hypertension. The sensibilities, specificities and accuracy of each criteria of the two leads ECG were calculated and the contrastive analysis was made. Results Each criteria had high specificity and low sensibility , and the differences of sensibility of each criteria is obvious. Conclusion Head-chest lead system is superior to Wilson lead system in the diagnosis of RVH; AR3 is a good criterion for the diagnosis of RVH.