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 was interpreted as showing atrialflutter with 2:1 conduction. Are you confident there is no ischemia? The heart rate could be compatible with that of a 2:1 conducted atrialflutter. Also, lead I could give the initial impression of showing flutter waves. Do you agree with this strategy?
Non-randomized trials show better outcomes (neurologic survival) using this device; see this article in Resuscitation: Head and Thorax Elevation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation using circulatory adjuncts is associated with improved survival. The patient had ROSC and maintained it. The patient had ROSC and maintained it.
If this STD were due to LVH or to subendocardial ischemia, rather than posterior OMI, it would be maximal in V5 and V6. If it is maximal in V1-V4, and the patient's presentation in consistent with ACS (as this certainly is), then it is DIAGNOSTIC of Occlusion with 90% specificity (We have an upcoming article that proves this).
There is a large peaked P-wave in lead II (right atrial enlargement) There is left axis deviation consistent with left anterior fascicular block. There is no evidence of infarction or ischemia. There is atrial activity before every QRS, but that activity has negative polarity, so it is not sinus rhythm.
Evidence of acute ischemia (may be subtle) vii. Annotated Bibliography For an excellent overview of ED Syncope management , see this article by Kessler C et al. starts at end of article on p. ST segment and T wave abnormalities consistent with or possibly related to myocardial ischemia. Left BBB vi. LVH or RV d.
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