Talk:Right axis deviation

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)

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)

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)

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)

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