Abstract
Comparison of angiocardiographic and postmortem measurements of the ventricular wall thickness in dogs was made. Angiocardiographic thickness of the ventricular wall was found to be 7.4% thinner than that proved at autopsy. The notable merits and little demerits of angiocardiographic determination of ventricular hypertrophy as compared with postmortem measurement were briefly discussed. Various electrocardiographic criteria for LVH appeared to give relatively high positivity but they also showed a high incidence of false positives. New sets of the criteria for LVH are herein proposed to give better results. Only one half of cases with angiocardiographically confirmed RVH was diagnosed with existing criteria for RVH, and the diagnosis of CVH was found to be extremely inaccurate.
