Diagnostic accuracy of a smartphone electrocardiograph in dogs: Comparison with standard 6-lead electrocardiography

Vezzosi, Tommaso; Buralli, Carlotta; Marchesotti, Federica; Porporato, Federico; Tognetti, Rosalba; Zini, Eric; Domenech, Oriol

doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2016.06.013

Cited by 32 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our study, the smartphone ECG tracings were interpretable in 89% of cases, which is in line with findings in other species. In particular, smartphone ECG tracings are interpretable in 87%‐99.6% of human patients, in 97.6% of dogs, and in 96% of horses . In 22% of our smartphone ECG tracings, short segments with motion or muscle tremor artifacts on the isoelectric line were present; however, they did not prevent measuring HR and ECG waves' duration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of smartphone‐based and standard base‐apex electrocardiography in healthy dairy cows

Bonelli

Vezzosi

Meylan

et al. 2018

Veterinary Internal Medicne

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background There is good diagnostic accuracy of smartphone‐based ECG in the evaluation of heart rate (HR), heart rhythm, and ECG values for humans, horses, dogs, and cats. Objectives Assess feasibility and reliability of a smartphone ECG device to evaluate HR expressed as beats per minute and ECG values in cows. Animals Fifty‐five healthy Holstein Friesian cows. Methods Prospective observational study. A standard base‐apex ECG was acquired for 60 seconds in each cow. A smartphone ECG tracing was recorded simultaneously using a single‐lead bipolar ECG recorder. All ECGs were reviewed by 1 blinded investigator. The following ECG variables were assessed: HR, P wave duration, PR interval, QRS complex and QT interval (milliseconds), P wave, and QRS complex polarity. Agreement between standard and smartphone ECG was evaluated by Cohen's k test and the Bland‐Altman test. Results Smartphone ECG tracings were interpretable in 89% of the recordings. Minimal differences of no clinical relevance were found between standard and smartphone ECG tracings regarding HR and duration of ECG waves and interval. Good agreement found in the evaluation of QRS complex polarity (85%) but not for P wave polarity (k = 0.006). Artifacts were rare but of significantly higher frequency in smartphone ECG compared to standard ECG tracings (22% versus 0%; P = .005). Conclusions and Clinical Importance Good quality single‐lead ECG tracings can be recorded by smartphone device in healthy cows. Smartphone tracings are reliable for evaluation of HR and selective ECG variables. Smartphone ECG can represent an additional tool for ECG screening in cows.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…The accuracy of smartphone ECG tracings in measuring heart rate (HR), evaluating heart rhythm, and detecting ECG changes associated with myocardial ischemia is acceptable . Similarly, in dogs, cats, and horses, smartphone ECG provided adequate tracings for the assessment of HR and cardiac rhythm …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of smartphone‐based and standard base‐apex electrocardiography in healthy dairy cows

Bonelli

Vezzosi

Meylan

et al. 2018

Veterinary Internal Medicne

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Animals tolerated it very well; it did not disturb them and their motion was not hindered. In veterinary medicine there are no reports on wearable sensors except for our pilot descriptions of this device (Brložnik & Avbelj 2015, 2017, Krvavica et al 2016, although the diagnostic utility of handheld wireless ECG monitors has already been evaluated in dogs and cats (Gwinn et al 2013, Kraus et al 2013, Mueller & Orvalho 2013, Vezzosi et al 2016.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…, Vezzosi et al . ), but there are no reports on wearable wireless sensors other than pilot information about the ECG monitor investigated in this study (Brložnik & Avbelj , , Krvavica et al . ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…are already used for a few-minute-long screening of patients for reliable assessment of heart rate and differentiation of various arrhythmias (Gwinn et al 2013, Kraus et al 2013, Mueller & Orvalho 2013, Kraus et al 2016, Vezzosi et al 2016, but there are no reports on wearable wireless sensors other than pilot information about the ECG monitor investigated in this study (Brložnik & Avbelj 2015, 2017, Krvavica et al 2016.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Wireless body sensor for electrocardiographic monitoring in dogs and cats

Brložnik

Likar

Krvavica

et al. 2018

J of Small Animal Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To evaluate the diagnostic utility of electrocardiogram data obtained by a wireless sensor from 36 dogs and four cats with suspected arrhythmias caused by cardiac or systemic diseases. Materials and Methods Wireless electrocardiographic recordings were obtained via two precordial electrodes attached to an electrocardiogram sensor connected to a smart device via low‐power Bluetooth technology. Cardiac rate, rhythm and duration of P‐QRS‐T waves were evaluated with VisECG® software. Fifteen‐ to 30‐minute wireless recordings were compared to standard electrocardiograms. Furthermore, the wireless sensor was used in 10 dogs and four cats for 24‐hour continuous electrocardiogram monitoring at home. Results When compared to standard electrocardiogram, equivalent results were obtained for heart rate and duration of different waves. Due to the longer recording time, more arrhythmias were diagnosed with the wireless device in 50% (15 of 30) of animals with arrhythmias. Satisfactory recordings were obtained when the dogs were resting, standing or walking but interpretation of the wireless electrocardiogram signal was not possible during strenuous physical activity. Clinical Significance Wireless electrocardiographic monitoring is a reliable and accurate method for identification of heart rate, arrhythmia and duration of electrocardiogram waves. A higher diagnostic yield of arrhythmias was documented with the wireless sensor due to prolonged monitoring. The device offers a good option for the long‐term monitoring of canine and feline cardiac rhythm.

show abstract

Evaluating the accuracy of a six‐lead smartphone‐based electrocardiographic device compared with standard electrocardiography in brachymorphic dogs

Romito

Castagna²,

Sabetti

et al. 2023

Veterinary Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundNo previous study has evaluated the accuracy of a six‐lead smartphone‐based electrocardiographic (s‐ECG) device in dogs.MethodsThis was a prospective multicentre study. Patients referred for cardiologic consultation were selected. In each patient, a 30‐second electrocardiogram was simultaneously acquired with a novel six‐lead s‐ECG and a standard six‐lead ECG machine (st‐ECG). A board‐certified cardiologist evaluated each recording. Nineteen ECG variables, including heart rate and rhythm, as well as quantitative and qualitative features of waves, segments and intervals, were analysed. Agreement between s‐ECG and st‐ECG was evaluated using Cohen's kappa coefficient and the Bland–Altman test.ResultsSeventy‐five dogs were enrolled, and 140 ECG tracings were analysed. There was perfect agreement between the two methodologies for heart rate and rhythm classification, both in dogs with sinus rhythm and those with pathological rhythms. Although some disagreement was found when comparing measurements of quantitative variables obtained with the s‐ECG and the st‐ECG, none of the differences was of clinical relevance.LimitationsThe sample size was limited, and the interobserver variability was not analysed.ConclusionThe six‐lead s‐ECG studied herein is comparable to the st‐ECG for heart rate and rhythm assessment, and seems clinically acceptable for the interpretation of waves, segments and intervals in dogs.

show abstract

Diagnostic accuracy of a smartphone electrocardiograph in dogs: Comparison with standard 6-lead electrocardiography

Cited by 32 publications

References 22 publications

Comparison of smartphone‐based and standard base‐apex electrocardiography in healthy dairy cows

Comparison of smartphone‐based and standard base‐apex electrocardiography in healthy dairy cows

Wireless body sensor for electrocardiographic monitoring in dogs and cats

Evaluating the accuracy of a six‐lead smartphone‐based electrocardiographic device compared with standard electrocardiography in brachymorphic dogs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About