There are many publications stating that ST
elevation in lead aVR, with diffuse ST depression elsewhere, is due to left
main (LM) occlusion. This is
even stated in the lastest 2013 ACC/AHA STEMI guidelines (O’Gara PT et al. JACC 61(4):e83; January 29, 2013). However, the guidelines use as evidence an article by
Jong et al. (Int Ht J 2006; 47(1):13-20). That article misleadingly defines "occlusion"
as any stenosis greater than 50%, when it should rather be defined as 100%, or
nearly so. All of the articles that
claim ST elevation in aVR is a sign of LM occlusion confuse LM occlusion with LM
insufficiency. In reality, ischemic ST
elevation in aVR occurs in two broad categories: 1) in patients with recognized
STEMI (due to coronary occlusion, usually of the LAD) and is associated with higher
mortality than in patients without STE in aVR and 2) in patients without
ischemic ST elevation, in which case there is always diffuse ST depression of subendocardial
ischemia (which can be due to supply-demand mismatch or due to ACS). If due to ACS, this STE in aVR is
associated not only with acute LM insufficiency, but alternatively with 3
vessel disease, or with LAD insufficiency.
More recently, Knotts et al. found that only 23% of patients with the aVR STE pattern had any LM disease (fewer if defined as ≥ 50% stenosis). Only 28% of patients had ACS of any vessel, and, of those patients, the LM was the culprit in just 49% (14% of all cases). It was a baseline finding in 62% of patients, usually due to LVH.
Reference: Knotts RJ, Wilson JM, Kim E, Huang HD, Birnbaum Y. Diffuse ST depression with ST elevation in aVR: Is this pattern specific for global ischemia due to left main coronary artery disease? J Electrocardiol 2013;46:240-8.
See this ECG in a patient with acute chest pain:
More recently, Knotts et al. found that only 23% of patients with the aVR STE pattern had any LM disease (fewer if defined as ≥ 50% stenosis). Only 28% of patients had ACS of any vessel, and, of those patients, the LM was the culprit in just 49% (14% of all cases). It was a baseline finding in 62% of patients, usually due to LVH.
Reference: Knotts RJ, Wilson JM, Kim E, Huang HD, Birnbaum Y. Diffuse ST depression with ST elevation in aVR: Is this pattern specific for global ischemia due to left main coronary artery disease? J Electrocardiol 2013;46:240-8.
See this ECG in a patient with acute chest pain:
The subendocardium is more susceptible to ischemia than the epicardium due to its proximity to the high pressure LV chamber and also because of its distance from the epicardial coronary arteries (the arteries that penetrate to the endocardium must travel a longer distance and go through the high pressure myocardium to the high pressure endocardium).
Of course, this is a very dangerous situation: the myocardium is ischemic, and if it is due to thrombus (due to ACS), then the thrombus can and often does propagate to occlude the entire artery and then result in STEMI.
Must you activate the cath lab?
Rokos et al. call this a "STEMI-equivalent" and suggest that the patient should go immediately to the cath lab (Rokos IC et al. Catheterization and Cardiovasc Interventions 79:1092-1098; 2012). However, in the data they present in this paper, there were 11 patients with true left main occlusion; 5 of them had ST elevation in lead aVR. But if one must read the fine print to realize that all 11 patients with the left main as the culprit vessel were enrolled in the study based upon the standard STEMI criteria on index ECG: 8 anterior, 1 inferior, 1 LBBB, and 1 without an ECG submitted to the core laboratory. In other words, these were STEMI that were already diagnosed as STEMI who also had ST elevation in lead aVR; one did not need lead aVR in order to make the diagnosis of STEMI.
The conundrum arises when there is STE in aVR and ST depression in many other leads, and thus it is not a classic STEMI. Is this situation a STEMI-equivalent?
As explained above, such ST depression with STE in aVR signifies diffuse subendocardial ischemia and is just as common in Non-ACS etiologies of ischemia (supply-demand mismatch) as in ACS etiologies. This is common in patients with GI bleed, sepsis, respiratory failure, severe anemia, tachydysrhythmias, severe hypertension, shock, and more.
For instance, see this case of carbon monoxide poisoning, with a CO level of 28%:
Diffuse ST depression with STE in aVR. It all resolved after hyperbaric therapy. There was no ACS. |
Cath
lab activation should only be done for ACS. For non-ACS etiologies of
diffuse ST depression, treat the underlying illness!
Of
course, it is not always easy to determine which came first, ACS or other
underlying illness:
1)
Did ACS initiate the ischemia, which then resulted in cardiogenic
shock, which then resulted in pulmonary edema with hypoxia, respiratory
failure, and tachycardia?
2)
Or was the inciting factor bleeding, hypoxia, or severe hypertension with
pulmonary edema and subsequent ischemia?
This
requires careful patient evaluation of volume status, laboratory values,
presence of pulmonary edema and of course much more. One must evaluate the patient, with help
from the ECG.
The
patient who has ST elevation in lead aVR that is not due
to ACS will have appropriate treatment delayed and will undergo harm with cath
lab activation.
Furthermore,
as stated above, even if
STE in aVR with diffuse ST depression is indeed due to ACS, it implies open arteries, not occluded
ones. There are institutions in which
cath lab activation is a major use of resources, and if cath lab activation at
night is not absolutely necessary, then it may be okay to avoid it. When
there is diffuse subendocardial ischemia (which may or may not be left main
insufficiency, but could also be LAD insufficiency, or 3 vessel insufficiency),
it is reasonable to treat medically with nitroglycerine, aspirin,
antithrombotics, and dual or triple antiplatelet therapy, and to re-assess.
Often, the thrombus will cool off and the chest pain and ECG findings
will resolve. If the symptoms resolve and the ST depression
greatly improves, then the patient can wait for the morning to go to the cath
lab as long as there is very close monitoring, preferably with continues 12-lead
ST segment monitoring. Ischemia due to ACS that is refractory to
medical therapy (persistent symptoms or persistent ECG findings) requires
emergent cath.
Left Main Occlusion
The majority of 100% left main occlusions do not make it alive to the ED, or arrive in arrest. At cath, only 0.19% - 1.3% of STEMI patients have LMCA occlusion (or 0.42% - 3% of anterior STEMI).
Below is the ECG of a patient who collapsed in v fib, underwent prolonged resuscitation and had return of spontaneous circulation, but was in cardiogenic shock:
Prehospital ECG:
Both the rhythm and QRST are difficult to interpret, but there is clearly a wide QRS with ST elevation in I, aVL and V1, and little if any STE in aVR (and who knows what in other precordial leads?) |
See explanation below the annotated version |
I have used lead II across the bottom to find the end of the QRS, then drawn a ling upward to find the end of the QRS in all other leads. This helps to find the beginning of the ST segment. |
This ECG is typical of a patient with left main OCCLUSION. In fact, it was not exactly LM occlusion, but rather simultaneous LAD and Circumflex occlusion, which is in effect the same problem.
--The rhythm again is difficult. There appear to be non-conducted P-waves. It may be supraventricular or nodal, or it could be idioventricular.
--There is a wide complex. If supraventricular, this is RBBB + LAFB (often seen in massive MI). If idioventricular, then it is originating near the left posterior fascicle, which then mimics RBBB + LAFB.
--In any case, there is ST elevation in I and aVL (high lateral MI) with reciprocal STD in inferior leads. There is also ST elevation in V2 and V4-V6.
Left Main occlusion results in an ECG with overlapping syndromes of proximal LAD occlusion (STE in V1-V6, I, aVL) and circumflex occlusion (lateral STE and posterior STEMI, which has ST depression in V1-V4, which may diminish the ST elevation of the anterior STEMI.
Below is the clearest discussion of Lead aVR in ACS that you will find.
Note it is divided into a 1) general discussion (short) 2) aVR in STEMI and 3) aVR in Non STE-ACS
The following article on aVR in ACS is taken from an article I wrote last year. Full text is available here. This excerpt is reprinted from Smith SW. Updates on the Electrocardiogram in Acute Coronary Syndromes. Current Emergency and Hospital Medicine Reports 2013; 1(1): 43-52.
1. Lead
aVR in Acute Coronary Syndromes.
It is important to note that when I use the term "left main disease" I do not refer to occlusion but to insufficiency; that is, enough obstruction to cause ischemia, but not fully occluded.
It is important to note that when I use the term "left main disease" I do not refer to occlusion but to insufficiency; that is, enough obstruction to cause ischemia, but not fully occluded.
There is a body of literature in the past decade on the significance of ST-segment elevation in lead aVR in ACS, and especially for its significance for diagnosis of left main coronary artery (LMCA) obstruction and 3-vessel disease.63-68 The literature is confusing for a few reasons. First, studies do not always clearly distinguish patients with and without STEMI. Second, LMCA “obstruction” is rarely defined, leaving it ambiguous as to whether the obstruction is 1) complete, 2) incomplete (subtotal), 3) complete but with good collateral circulation or 4) intermittent. Third, the studies were nearly all small with a retrospectively identified group with LMCA ACS. Fourth, findings may be influence by individual anatomy, ischemic preconditioning, and the timing of ECG recording. Since patients with LMCA occlusion do not often survive to the cath lab, the pretest probability for any positive ECG findings is low, and any reported sensitivities and specificities may distort the clinician’s assessment of the actual presence of disease.
Lead
aVR in STEMI
Lead aVR in STEMI
is touted as important for recognizing LMCA occlusion.68
Since patients with STEMI are already identified as a group which needs
immediate reperfusion therapy, the primary importance of recognizing LMCA
involvement in STEMI is 1) to recognize the increased mortality associated with
this finding and 2) in the potential to avoid thienopyridine (e.g.,
clopidogrel) administration in such patients who are likely to need CABG and
may suffer from excessive bleeding if they do receive a thienopyridine.
Only 0.19% - 1.3%
of STEMI patients have LMCA occlusion, or 0.42% - 3% of anterior STEMI,69, 70 partly because patients with
occlusion do not frequently survive to the cath lab. Mortality is 50%, and over 70% present in
cardiogenic shock, such that the diagnosis of severe ACS and need for cath lab
activation is usually apparent from the clinical presentation, rather than the
ECG. In contrast, approximately 10% of
patients with anterior STEMI have STE of at least 1 mm in aVR (as measured at
60 ms after the J-point),66 and 25% have at least 0.5 mm STE
in aVR (as measured at 60 ms after the J-point, relative to the TP segment).63
STE or STD of 1 mm or more in
anterior STEMI portended a worse prognosis (compared to no STE or STD), even
after correcting for STE or STD elsewhere on the ECG, but only ST depression in
aVR (“reciprocal to injury in the area of lead V7”) remained significant when
corrected for all other ECG and
clinical factors.66
STE in aVR of at least 0.5 mm in anterior STEMI predicts septal AMI
(occlusion of the LAD proximal to the first septal perforator) with a PPV and
NPV of 70% and 80%63 better than STE in V1, which at
a cutoff of > 2.5 mm had 12% sensitivity and 100% specificity, with PPV and
NPV of 100% and 39%.71
Kotoku et al.64 similarly found that STE in aVR
correlated with proximal (vs. distal) LAD occlusion and was negatively
correlated with a long (vs. short), or wraparound, LAD that affected the
inferior wall. This is intuitive, as a
proximal occlusion would lead to basal wall STEMI (see below), and distal
occlusion of a wraparound (long, “type III”) LAD would lead to inferior STE
which would reciprocally attenuate the STE in aVR, or lead to STD in aVR. To be complete, Wong also found that STE in
aVR in inferior STEMI conferred worse
outcomes.66
The study by Yamaji
et al. is cited as evidence that STE in aVR > STE in V1 is 81% sensitive and
80% specific for identifying the LMCA as the culprit.72
[Incidentally, this study has been cited among the general ACS
literature;68 however, it applies to STEMI
only, as methods required TIMI 0-1 flow.]
If its conclusions are accurate, and one considers that 0.4%-3% of LMCA
occlusions make it to the cath lab alive, then the positive predictive value
(PPV) of STE in aVR greater than STE in V1 is only 1.6%-11%, rendering this finding
useless. Furthermore, in the study by
Kurisu et al. of consecutive STEMI, written as a letter, 25 (about 3% of those
with anterior STE) had LMCA occlusion; they compared ECG measurements of the 25
LMCA occlusions to only 30 each of consecutive LAD, RCA, and circumflex
occlusions and found sensitivity and specificity for LMCA, vs. LAD, of STE in
aVR greater than STE in V1 of 40% and 93%, resulting in a PPV of only 15%.70
A suggested
explanation for STE in aVR greater than V1 in LMCA STEMI (due to occlusion) is that aVR
overlies the injured basal septum. The
STE registered in V1, and presumably also other right precordial leads V2-V4,
is partly attenuated by the reciprocal ST depression of the posterior wall
STEMI that is due to obstruction of flow in the circumflex artery. The most likely explanation for STE in both
aVL and aVR is similar: in addition to anterior and basal septal STEMI, there
is high lateral STEMI from absence of circumflex flow, such that the ST vector is
superior (a “superior” STEMI), as well as anterior.65
Lead
aVR in Non-STE-ACS
Lead aVR has been
ignored in the past because it is 180° opposite from an imaginary lead between
leads I and II, and therefore would provide no independent data. More recent claims that ST elevation in aVR
is independent of ST depression in these opposing leads have not been
substantiated for Non-STEMI, though this appears to be true for STEMI (see
above). Nevertheless, it is convenient
to use one lead with ST elevation (aVR) as a substitute for many others with ST
depression, such that, in Non-STE-ACS, the degree of ST elevation in aVR
correlates with the number of leads with ST depression, the depth of the ST
depression, and the sum of ST depressions.67, 73-76
In all studies, measurements of the ST segment are at 80 ms after the
J-point for ST depression and 20 ms after the J-point for ST elevation, both
relative to the TP segment.
To very briefly
summarize the literature, diffuse ST depression has a good PPV and NPV for
3-vessel and left main disease (not occlusion!).73, 77
The degree of STE in aVR, though not independent of ST depression, has
strong association with outcome independent of clinical factors such as Killip
class and blood pressure.74, 76
Barrabes et al. studied 775 Non-STEMIs and found that, compared to no
STE in aVR, STE of 0.5 to 1.0 mm had odds ratio (OR) for death of 4.2 (1.5 -
12.2), and STE of ≥ 1.0 mm had OR of 6.6 (2.5 – 17.6).74
There were 475 who underwent angiography; of those with ≥ 1 mm of STE in
aVR (n=92), 48% had 3 vessel disease and 18% had LMCA disease, compared to 21%
and 4% for those with less than 1 mm STE in aVR.74
Kosuge et al.75 (2005) studied 310 patients with
ACS without STE. They found that STE in
aVR of ≥ 0.5 mm was the strongest predictor of LMCA or 3-vessel disease, with an
OR of 19.7, and it identified LMCA or 3-vessel disease with 78% sensitivity and
86% specificity, and a PPV and NPV of 57% and 95%. Finally, Szymanski et al. in 2008 found
mortality correlated with the degree of STE in lead aVR, independent of TIMI
score, and was highly associated with ST depression in multiple locations.
In 2011, Kosuge et
al.67
studied 572 patients with Non-STE-ACS; among the 196 with a positive
troponin T on admission, the sensitivity and specificity of STE ≥ 1.0 mm in aVR
for LMCA or 3-vessel disease was 80% and 93%, with a PPV of 56% and an NPV of
98%, and accuracy of 92%. OR of degree
of STE in aVR for severe 3-vessel or LMCA disease among all patients was 29
(9.5 – 50). CABG was undertaken in 46%
of those with severe 3-vessel or LMCA disease vs. 2% of those without. The authors suggest withholding clopidogrel
in patients with Non-STEMI and STE in aVR of at least 1 mm.
Summary
of lead aVR in ACS:
Thus, STE in aVR in Non-STEMI, though not independent of ST depression
elsewhere, is a good approximation of the sum of STD and is a very useful
predictor of poor outcomes and of need for CABG, independent of other clinical
data. In Non STE-ACS, STE in aVR is reciprocal
to diffuse ST depression, opposite (reciprocal) to a negative ST vector towards I, II, and
V5, and is a result of subendocardial ischemia.
On the other hand, the STE in aVR in STEMI,
usually anterior STEMI, is more
likely a result of transmural injury (STEMI of the basal septum). In this latter case the STE in aVR is not
reciprocal to any ST depression, but directly indicative of injury.
Finally, the most relevant practical
applications are:
1) In
Non-STEMI, if
there is STE in aVR ≥ 1.0 mm, it may be prudent to withhold clopidogrel
2) In
both STEMI and Non-STEMI, the degree of STE in aVR correlates with
worse disease and worse outcomes, independent of the clinical presentation;
these patients must be treated aggressively with early angiography and
revascularization.
References
STEMI -equivalents:
1. Jong, GP et al. Reciprocal Changes in 12-Lead Electrocardiography Can Predict Left Main Coronary Artery Lesion in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction. International Heart Journal 47:13-20; 2006.
2. Rokos IC et al. Correlation Between Index Electrocardiographic Patterns and Pre-Intervention Angiographic Findings: Insights From the HORIZONS-AMI Trial. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 79:1092-1098; 2012.
3. Rokos IC. French WJ.
Mattu A et al. Appropriate
Cardiac Cath Lab activation: Optimizing electrocardiogram interpretation and
clinical decisionmaking
for acute
ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Am
Heart J 2010;160:995-1003.e8
63. Aygul N, Ozdemir K, Tokac M, et al. Value
of lead aVR in predicting acute occlusion of proximal left anterior descending
coronary artery and in-hospital outcome in ST-elevation myocardial infarction:
an electrocardiographic predictor of poor prognosis. J Electrocardiol
2008;41(4):335-41.
64. Kotoku M, Tamura A, Abe Y, Kadota J.
Determinants of ST-segment level in lead aVR in anterior wall acute myocardial
infarction with ST-segment elevation. J Electrocardiol 2009;42(2):112-7.
65. Nikus KC, Eskola MJ. Electrocardiogram
patterns in acute left main coronary artery occlusion. J Electrocardiol
2008;41(6):626-9.
66. Wong CK, Gao W, Stewart RA, French JK,
Aylward PE, White HD. The prognostic meaning of the full spectrum of aVR
ST-segment changes in acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J
2012;33(3):384-92.
67. Kosuge M, Ebina T, Hibi K, et al. An
early and simple predictor of severe left main and/or three-vessel disease in
patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome. Am J Cardiol
2011;107(4):495-500.
68. Lead aVR: Importance of the
"Forgotten 12th Lead" in Patients With ACS. Medscape Emergency
Medicine, 2009. (Accessed July 20, 2012, at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/589781.)
69. Zoghbi GJ, Misra VK, Brott BC, et al. ST
Elevation Myocardial Infarction due to Left Main Culprit Lesions: Percutaneous
Coronary Intervention Outcomes (abstract) In: Journal of the American College
of Cardiology; 2010 March 9; Georgia; 2010. p. E1712.
70. Kurisu S, Inoue I, Kawagoe
T, et al. Electrocardiographic
features in patients with acute myocardial infarction associated with left main
coronary artery occlusion. Heart 2004;90(9):1059-60.
71. Engelen DJ, Gorgels AP, Cheriex EC, et
al. Value of the electrocardiogram in localizing the occlusion site in the left
anterior descending coronary artery in acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll
Cardiol 1999;34(2):389-95.
72. Yamaji H, Iwasaki K, Kusachi S, et al.
Prediction of acute left main coronary artery obstruction by 12-lead
electrocardiography. ST segment elevation in lead aVR with less ST segment
elevation in lead V(1). J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;38(5):1348-54.
73. Gorgels AP, Vos MA, Mulleneers
R, de Zwaan C, Bar FW, Wellens HJ. Value
of the electrocardiogram in diagnosing the number of severely narrowed coronary
arteries in rest angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol 1993;72(14):999-1003.
74. Barrabes JA, Figueras J, Moure C,
Cortadellas J, Soler-Soler J. Prognostic value of lead aVR in patients with a
first non-ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction. Circulation
2003;108(7):814-9.
75. Kosuge M, Kimura K, Ishikawa T, et al.
Predictors of left main or three-vessel disease in patients who have acute
coronary syndromes with non-ST-segment elevation. Am J Cardiol
2005;95(11):1366-9.
76. Szymanski FM, Grabowski M, Filipiak KJ,
Karpinski G, Opolski G. Admission ST-segment elevation in lead aVR as the
factor improving complex risk stratification in acute coronary syndromes. Am J
Emerg Med 2008;26(4):408-12.
77. Barrabes JA, Figueras J, Moure C,
Cortadellas J, Soler-Soler J. Prognostic significance of ST segment depression
in lateral leads I, aVL, V5 and V6 on the admission electrocardiogram in patients
with a first acute myocardial infarction without ST segment elevation. J Am
Coll Cardiol 2000;35(7):1813-9.
Dr Smith,
ReplyDeleteIn Non STE ACS, the negative ST vector of subendocardial ischemia points towards leads I,II and V5.
Can you please comment on the significance, if any, of concurrent ST elevation in lead III?
Does this confound the findings of Non STE ACS, or is this a normal finding in Non STE ACS?
Thank you,
Dave B
Dave,
DeleteOf course there is no rule that says you cannot have multiple types of ischemia simultaneously. In fact, co-culprits are pretty common, and there are theories out there that systemic inflammation can trigger double ACS all at once.
Diffuse ST depression with STE in aVR is typical of left main insufficiency, 3 vessel insufficiency and occasionally also just LAD insufficiency.
Anyone with 3 vessel disease and ACS may have one of those 3 vessels occlude.
Thus, you can have 3 vessel disease and inferior STEMI both at once.
That is what happened here: http://hqmeded-ecg.blogspot.com/2014/04/a-non-stemi-that-needs-cath-lab-now.html
Cool case. Check it out!!
Steve
Just to be clear, I take it you're talking about those cases where we see the ST-elevation vector pointed towards the base of the heart: rightward, upward, and a bit posterior (essentially towards the right shoulder). It seems like clear-cut subendocardial ischemia, but then you also notice elevation in lead III and worry that you could be mis-classifying a true STEMI.
DeleteThese can be tough.
The first thing to consider is frontal plane angle of the ST-vector we're talking about. With plain subendocardial ischemia (SEI), (in my experience) it tends to run anywhere from 190 to 240 degrees (another digression, I always think in terms of ST-elevation vectors to avoid the confusion of switching between elevation and depression). In an ideal world, the ST-vector would always be 210 degrees (towards aVR), and thus perpendicular to lead III. Things are never that easy, so when you see SEI with an ST-vector of 190 or 200 degrees, you'll expect to also see elevation in lead III since the vector is now angled slightly towards that lead. Likewise, you can also see a little depression in III when the angle of the ST-vector is higher towards 220 or 230 degrees. So, this elevation in III can be "normal" and expected.
As Dr. Smith alluded to though, you can also see the same or a very similar pattern with double-culprit ACS. Sometimes the vector will be a bit off from our expectations (in his linked case it's more like 180 degrees in the frontal plane), but sometimes there won't even be a hint. This sounds like a destined-to-lose scenario, but we do have a way out. As Dr. Smith also discussed, refractory ischemia in the setting of SEI is a ticket to the cath lab. If you have do encounter co-culprit ACS, one of two things will happen: you will either be unable to relieve the ischemia medically (patient goes to cath) or the ischemia will resolve (patient can wait a bit for cath). It's one of those situations where managing things clinically is infinitely simpler than trying to tease out a diagnosis that's not even needed to guide treatment.
I've also seen this pattern of SEI combined with old inferior STEMI with ventricular aneurysm (causing persistent inferior ST-elevation), and in that case the ST-vector was well below 180 degrees - really mimicking acute inferior STEMI. The only saving grace there would be old EKG, clinical suspicion, and echo.
And here is such a case: http://hqmeded-ecg.blogspot.com/2014/04/a-non-stemi-that-needs-cath-lab-now.html
DeleteThank you so much for this post! I've been meaning to put together a discussion like this for a while, but it's much better that I can just refer folks to your expert opinions since the cries of "STEMI equivalent!!" and "LMCA occlusion!!" can be tough to deflect without a lot of weight behind the writing.
ReplyDeleteTHANKS for putting this all in one place Steve. I will send many from our EKG Club to this site - as this misunderstanding about the difference between occlusion vs high-grade narrowing (diffuse ST dep; ST elev in aVR) continues to arise ... - :)
ReplyDeleteDr-smith
ReplyDeleteyou said " Left Main occlusion results in an ECG with overlapping syndromes of proximal LAD occlusion (STE in V1-V6, I, aVL) and circumflex occlusion (lateral STE and posterior STEMI, which has ST depression in V1-V4, which may diminish the ST elevation of the anterior STEMI"
does this applied to LCx dominant or RCA dominant ? as you said LCx oclussion (lateral STEMI and posterior STEMI)
Mostafa,
DeleteThat would apply to right dominant (85-90%).
Left dominant would be unlikely to survive to the hospital
Steve
Thank you so much for this post! I've been meaning to put together a discussion like this for a while, but it's much better that I can just refer folks to your expert opinions since the cries of "STEMI equivalent!!" and "LMCA occlusion!!" can be tough to deflect without a lot of weight behind the writing.
ReplyDeletethanks for the feedback!
DeleteGreat discussion. I love reading article like this. It seems like reputable journal which is used for learners who conduct their final study. Moreover, it could be their references dealing with ST elevation.
ReplyDeleteRegards