This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The ECG did not meet STEMI criteria, and the final cardiology interpretation was “ST and T wave abnormality, consider anterior ischemia”. There’s only minimal ST elevation in III, which does not meet STEMI criteria of 1mm in two contiguous leads. But STEMI criteria is only 43% sensitive for OMI.[1]
I sent this to the Queen of Hearts So the ECG is both STEMI negative and has no subtle diagnostic signs of occlusion. Non-STEMI guidelines call for “urgent/immediate invasive strategy is indicated in patients with NSTE-ACS who have refractory angina or hemodynamic or electrical instability,” regardless of ECG findings.[1]
If we took this as the gold standard, we would conclude that the computer interpretation was safe and accurate at least accurate enough to not miss STEMI, and that physicians should not be interrupted to interpret it, because there would be no change in patient management. What is the gold standard for ECG interpretation: patient outcome!!!
Now it is a full blown STEMI of 3 myocardial territories: inferior, posterior, and lateral But at least it does not call it "Normal." Learning Points: You cannot trust conventional algorithms even to find STEMI(+) OMI, even when they say "normal ECG." At this point — a STEMI was diagnosed, and cardiac cath with PCI was performed.
The limb leads have been removed because there was no ST elevation in those leads, the QRS complexes have been obscured because this is irrelevant to STEMI criteria, and red lines have been added to measure ST segment elevation. But STEMI criteria ignore all this and look at ST segments in isolation.
The de Winter electrocardiogram pattern is an infrequent presentation, reported to occur in 2% to 3.4% This ECG pattern is my favorite example of how the STEMI criteria are fundamentally flawed. We have a series of 20 TIMI-0 LAD Occlusions that do meet STEMI criteria. 2024, January 31). 17 have HATW. Under Review.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join thousands of users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content