Search

Background: Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS), with or without ST-segment elevation, is a major contributor to global mortality and morbidity. Swift diagnosis and treatment are vital for mitigating cardiac damage and improving long-term outcomes. The 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) currently serves as the gold standard for diagnosis in ACS with ST-segment elevation and may support the diagnosis in ACS without ST-segment elevation. However, the growing prevalence of smartwatches enables the acquisition of electrocardiographic data without traditional ECG equipment. While smaller studies support smartwatch ECG use, larger-scale validation within ACS remains lacking. The ACS WATCH II study aims to validate smartwatch ECG recordings for ACS. Methods: The primary objective is to validate smartwatch-obtained electrocardiographic data in patients presenting with ACS. Two cohorts of 120 patients each, presenting ACS with and without ST-segment elevation, will be assessed. Smartwatches will capture recordings of leads I, III, and V2 alongside standard ECGs. These leads, chosen due to a 97% ACS diagnosis sensitivity in previous studies, will undergo blind evaluation by two experienced external assessors against conventional ECG. Additionally, a control sample of 60 healthy individuals will be included. Conclusions: ACS WATCH II pioneers large-scale prospective validation of smartwatch ECG recordings in ACS patients. Additionally, it indirectly validates a swift diagnostic approach using three leads (I, III, and V2). This could expedite time-critical ACS diagnoses and simplify access through smartwatch-based diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Smartwatches have become a widely used tool for health self-care. Its role in ischemic heart disease (IHD) has not been assessed. Objetcive: The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of smartwatch ECG registry in IHD. Methods: We present an observational study of 25 consecutive patients with acute IHD. Conventional ECG and smartwatch tracing were obtained simultaneously at admission. Waves of conventional and smartwatch ECGs were objectively compared. A survey on medical attitude was conducted among 12 physicians (3 cardiologists, 3 intensivists, 3 emergency physicians, and 3 general practitioners) and a score (1–5) of concordance between the records was requested. Results: There were no differences in Q-wave, R-wave, ST segment, or T-wave. There was a very strong correlation between ST segments, a strong correlation in Q-waves and R-waves, and a moderate correlation in T-wave measurements. All specialists obtained a high level of agreement (4.45 ± 0.45). Smartwatch tracings would lead to similar management compared to conventional ECG. There were only 6 (2%) discrepant cases due to differences in inferior repolarization, showing an almost perfect agreement (kappa = 0.96). Conclusions: In most patients with acute IHD, smartwatch ECG tracing is a reliable tool to make the diagnosis and guide appropriate medical care. However, due to their intrinsic limitations, inferior myocardial infarctions may be missed and require a conventional 12-lead ECG to rule them out. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]