Virtually all the objections that have been voiced against the Master Two-Step postexercise electrocardiogram are predicated on the following four factors: (1) the safety of this procedure in patients with atherosclerotic heart disease; (2) the occurrence of false positive responses; (3) the inability to determine exactly when ischemic changes occur during exercise; (4) the inability to determine whether the absence of ischemic changes in the immediate postexercise period represents false negative information. Improved instrumentation and interpretation of electrographic tracings have partially obviated objections based on the first two factors, and presumably, also account for the growing acceptance of this diagnostic procedure in recent years. Despite these improvements and the outgrowths of their use, however, the latter two factors continue to represent basic shortcomings.Attempts to overcome these shortcomings have been concerned with the development of techniques which, instead of exercise, employ the use of anoxemial or drugs2-4 to induce electrocardiographic changes. Additionally, refinements in electrocardiographic instrumentation and technique have also been advanced that allow continuous recording of the electrocardiogram during exercise and the immediate postexercise period.The earliest of these refinements were beset with numerous technical difficulties, particularly those responsible for the presence of artifacts in the tracings, 6 Recently, however, an excellent procedure has been devised,7 , which appears to have successfully eliminated practically all of the earlier difficulties.The purpose of this report is to describe several refinements to the electrocardiographic instrumentation employed with this new procedure, and to demonstrate their utility in evaluating the activity of pentaerythritol tetranitrate, a widely used coronary vasodilator.
MATERIAL AND METHODElectrocardiographic equipment. Refinements to the instrumentation employed with the original procedure7 > 8 are shown in figure 1 and described as follows.1. The 2 by 2 cm2 stainless-steel wire mesh (no. 80 and 0.0055 of an inch in thickness) ear electrode was made in the form of an earring with a thumb-screw attachment (A). This facilitated attachment of the electrode to the ear, and provided for a more stable electrode-to-skin contact during exercise. 2. The chest electrodes, identical to the ear electrode in size, shape and composition, were recessed (about 1,~ of an inch) in a small sponge rubber &dquo;shield&dquo; (B) instead of hard rubber tubing. This eliminated the more cumbersome foam rubber cushion originally utilized.3. All the electrodes were connected to the appropriate lead cables by a 36-in. length of extremely lightweight, silk-covered, 105-strand flexible wire (C) ; this is not shown for the ear electrode. The RCA plug jackphono input described in the original procedure was replaced with a lightweight friction collet jack plug (D), which was soldered to the end of the flexible wire opposite the electrode. The lead cables ...