From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

The first sentence of this article is completely incomprehensible to those of us who do not already have a basic medical education. Please expand. Bwrs ( talk) 23:32, 22 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Untitled

The first sentence of this article is completely incomprehensible to those of us who do not already have a basic medical education. Please expand. Bwrs ( talk) 23:32, 22 March 2010 (UTC) reply

It is not only incomprehensible, it is just incorrect. Right axis deviation is not necessarily congenital, and has nothing to do with being congenital. It is simply a finding on electrocardiogram that describes the direction (axis) of electrical conduction through the heart using the standard electrocardiogram leads. The direction of electrical conduction through the heart changes dependent on a few factors, some of which can be congential, but others that are clearly acquired (such as a heart attack leading to fibrotic heart tissue that is no longer electrically conductive).

(I'm a med student) Vihsadas ( talk) 05:10, 29 April 2013 (UTC) reply

Figure 3

thumb|Figure 3. Leads I and III appear to be 'leaving' in Left Axis Deviation; Leads I and III appear to be 'reaching' in Right Axis Deviation|314x314px

Figure 3 is wrong.

The normal axis is from -30 to +90. The perpendicular axis to -30 is lead II. Therefore an axis of -30 is isoelectric in lead II. With left axis deviation, lead II becomes negative.

From "The ECG Made Easy" by John Hampton, 8th edition, page 16: "If in lead II the S wave is greater than the R wave, the axis must be more than 90° away from lead II. In other words, it must be at a greater angle than -30°, and closer to the vertical, and left axis deviation is present." Axl ¤ [Talk] 12:06, 20 November 2016 (UTC) reply

agree w/ Axl, the reference supports the text-- Ozzie10aaaa ( talk) 13:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC) reply
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

The first sentence of this article is completely incomprehensible to those of us who do not already have a basic medical education. Please expand. Bwrs ( talk) 23:32, 22 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Untitled

The first sentence of this article is completely incomprehensible to those of us who do not already have a basic medical education. Please expand. Bwrs ( talk) 23:32, 22 March 2010 (UTC) reply

It is not only incomprehensible, it is just incorrect. Right axis deviation is not necessarily congenital, and has nothing to do with being congenital. It is simply a finding on electrocardiogram that describes the direction (axis) of electrical conduction through the heart using the standard electrocardiogram leads. The direction of electrical conduction through the heart changes dependent on a few factors, some of which can be congential, but others that are clearly acquired (such as a heart attack leading to fibrotic heart tissue that is no longer electrically conductive).

(I'm a med student) Vihsadas ( talk) 05:10, 29 April 2013 (UTC) reply

Figure 3

thumb|Figure 3. Leads I and III appear to be 'leaving' in Left Axis Deviation; Leads I and III appear to be 'reaching' in Right Axis Deviation|314x314px

Figure 3 is wrong.

The normal axis is from -30 to +90. The perpendicular axis to -30 is lead II. Therefore an axis of -30 is isoelectric in lead II. With left axis deviation, lead II becomes negative.

From "The ECG Made Easy" by John Hampton, 8th edition, page 16: "If in lead II the S wave is greater than the R wave, the axis must be more than 90° away from lead II. In other words, it must be at a greater angle than -30°, and closer to the vertical, and left axis deviation is present." Axl ¤ [Talk] 12:06, 20 November 2016 (UTC) reply

agree w/ Axl, the reference supports the text-- Ozzie10aaaa ( talk) 13:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook