CLINICAL EVALUATION OF AN 18-LEAD ECG DEVICE'S PERFORMANCE AND SAFETY: A PROSPECTIVE PAIRED-DEVICE STUDY
Keywords:
Electrocardiography, 18-Lead ECG, Diagnostic accuracy, Medical device validation, ST-segment analysis, Cardiac safetyAbstract
This prospective, single-center study was designed to validate the clinical performance and safety of the Zoncare iMAC1800pro (iMAC-Series) 18-lead digital multi-channel electrocardiograph, with the ED** SE-18 as the reference standard. A total of 154 participants were enrolled and stratified into three cohorts: normal ECG (n=54), arrhythmia (n=50), and ST-segment abnormality (n=50). Each subject underwent simultaneous 18-lead ECG recordings using both devices, which were connected to the same set of skin electrodes via a standard passive Y-lead splitter cable. Key parameters including heart rate, PR interval, QRS duration, QT interval, QTc value, P-wave axis, QRS axis, T-wave axis, and ST-segment deviation were automatically measured by both systems and manually verified by senior cardiologists (with senior professional titles and more than 10 years of ECG diagnostic experience). The Zoncare iMAC1800pro showed clinical equivalence to the reference device in all measured parameters, with no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05). ST-segment elevation/depression and the maximum elevation/depression amplitude (all P > 0.05), indicating excellent consistency between the two devices in ST-segment deviation measurement. No device-related adverse events or equipment malfunctions were reported during the study. These findings confirm the clinical reliability and safety of the Zoncare iMAC1800pro for routine electrocardiographic assessment.References
[1] International Organization for Standardization. Clinical Investigation of Medical Devices for Human Subjects – Good Clinical Practice (ISO 14155:2020).Geneva: ISO, 2020.
[2] National Medical Products Administration of China. Guidelines for clinical trial design of medical devices (2018). Beijing: China Medical Science Press, 2018.
[3] International Electrotechnical Commission. Medical Electrical Equipment – Part 2-25: Particular Requirements for the Basic Safety and Essential Performance of Electrocardiographs (IEC 60601-2-25:2011). Geneva, Switzerland: IEC, 2011.
[4] National Medical Products Administration. Medical Electrical Equipment – Part 2-25: Particular Requirements for the Basic Safety and Essential Performance of Electrocardiographs (GB 9706.225-2021). Beijing: China Standards Press, 2021.
[5] Rautaharju PM, Surawicz B, Gettes LS, et al. AHA/ACCF/HRS recommendations for the standardization and interpretation of the electrocardiogram: part IV: the ST segment, T and U waves, and the QT interval. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2009, 53(11): 982-991.
[6] Sun Z. Medical Statistics. 3rd ed. Beijing: People's Medical Publishing House, 2002.
[7] Zhou ZJ, Han ZH, Li J. A randomized clinical study on the effectiveness and safety of the XM-310 portable electrocardiograph. Chinese Journal of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diseases, 2023, 42(7): 688-692.
[8] Ma W. Research progress on the application of digital electrocardiographs. China Medical Device Information, 2024, 29(9): 68-70.