This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by HUGENHOLTZ, P. G. Articles by LEVINE, H. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by HUGENHOLTZ, P. G. Articles by LEVINE, H. D. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Heart Attack

(Circulation. 1961;24:808.)
© 1961 American Heart Association, Inc.

---

A Clinical Appraisal of the Vectorcardiogram in Myocardial Infarction

I. The Cube System

PAUL G. HUGENHOLTZ M.D.¹; GERALD H. WHIPPLE M.D.¹; HAROLD D. LEVINE M.D.¹

¹ From the Medical Clinic of the Peter Bent Brigham Hospital and the Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

A total of 161 vectorcardiograms was recorded with the Grishman cube system in patients with suspected myocardial infarction. In the group of 49 cases subsequently examined post mortem and of 73 non-autopsied cases, in whom the diagnosis of infarction appeared certain, a comparison was made between the standard electrocardiogram and the vectorcardiogram taken in succession. The vectorcardiogram demonstrated more infarcts than the electrocardiogram. Of a total of 122 cases in which the vectorcardiogram showed infarction, 19 had normal and 17 equivocal electrocardiograms. A number of simple and easily applicable criteria for the vectorcardiographic diagnosis of infarction are given. It appears that even the older, uncorrected cubelead system permits a more accurate diagnosis than currently available standard electrocardiographic procedure. It is suggested that this method of exploration may be useful in cases of suspected myocardial infarction in which the routine electrocardiographic examination leaves doubt.