Literature DB >> 2735591

Initial ECG in Q wave and non-Q wave myocardial infarction.

F M Fesmire1, R F Percy, R L Wears, T L MacMath.   

Abstract

The initial ECGs in 440 patients admitted for suspected acute myocardial infarction were retrospectively analyzed to determine predictive values of these ECGs for acute myocardial infarction and to determine differences in the initial ECG for Q wave and non-Q wave myocardial infarction. One hundred (23%) of the study patients were diagnosed as having an acute myocardial infarction. Acute injury was seen in 47% of these patients (positive predictive value [PPV], 84%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 72% to 92%), ischemia in 15% (PPV, 39%; 95% CI, 24% to 57%), and left ventricular hypertrophy with strain in 11% (PPV, 19%; 95% CI, 4% to 29%). Forty-three patients were diagnosed as having a Q wave infarction and 50 patients as having a non-Q wave infarction. Seventy-two percent of the patients with a Q wave infarction had acute injury as the initial ECG interpretation compared with 38% in the non-Q wave infarction group (P less than .001). In contrast, only 17% of patients with Q wave infarction had an initial ECG interpretation of ischemia or strain as compared with 36% of patients with non-Q wave infarction (P = .03). Because of the relatively high incidence of acute myocardial infarction in patients admitted with an initial ECG interpretation of ischemia or left ventricular hypertrophy with strain, prospective studies must be performed to determine if selective patients with acute ST segment depression or ischemic T wave inversion in the setting of suspected acute myocardial infarction may benefit from early thrombolytic therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2735591     DOI: 10.1016/s0196-0644(89)80007-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Emerg Med        ISSN: 0196-0644            Impact factor:   5.721


  8 in total

1.  The acute myocardial infarction patient with an initially non-diagnostic electrocardiogram.

Authors:  W J Brady; F Morris
Journal:  J Accid Emerg Med       Date:  1999-09

Review 2.  Platelet reactivity and the identification of acute coronary syndromes in the emergency department.

Authors:  Chad E Darling; Alan D Michelson; Gregory A Volturo; Karin Przyklenk
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2008-07-04       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 3.  Detecting acute cardiac ischemia in the emergency department: a review of the literature.

Authors:  B D McCarthy; J B Wong; H P Selker
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1990 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Management strategies for patients with low-risk chest pain in the emergency department.

Authors:  Maame Yaa A B Yiadom; Joshua M Kosowsky
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2011-02

5.  Evolving considerations in the management of patients with left bundle branch block and suspected myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Ian J Neeland; Michael C Kontos; James A de Lemos
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 24.094

6.  ROMEO: a rapid rule out strategy for low risk chest pain. Does it work in a UK emergency department?

Authors:  C Taylor; A Forrest-Hay; S Meek
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.740

7.  Is every chest pain a cardiac event? : an audit of patients with chest pain presenting to emergency services in India.

Authors:  Sahoo Saddichha; Mukul Kumar Saxena
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2009-04-15       Impact factor: 3.397

8.  Diagnostic values of chest pain history, ECG, troponin and clinical gestalt in patients with chest pain and potential acute coronary syndrome assessed in the emergency department.

Authors:  Arash Mokhtari; Eric Dryver; Martin Söderholm; Ulf Ekelund
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2015-05-07
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.