A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Which admission electrocardiographic parameter is more powerful predictor of no-reflow in patients with acute anterior myocardial infarction who underwent primary percutaneous intervention? | LitMetric

Background: Acute transmural ischemia due to left anterior descending artery (LAD) occlusion changes precordial R and Q wave durations owing to depressed intramyocardial activation. We investigated the prognostic value of sum of precordial Q wave duration/sum of precordial R wave duration ratio (Q/R) in patients with first acute anterior myocardial infarction (AAMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI).

Methods: In this prospective analysis, we evaluated the no-reflow predictive value of Q/R on 403 patients with first AAMI. Patients were divided into two as no-reflow group (n=32) and control (n=371) group according to post-PPCI flow status.

Results: The patients in the no-reflow group had significantly higher Q/R on admission electrocardiography (ECG) compared to patients in the control group (p<0.001). When admission ECG parameters were compared according to no-reflow prediction, Q/R was stronger than other well-accepted parameters. The best cut-off value of the Q/R to predict no-reflow was 1.08 with 76% sensitivity and 73% specificity (AUC: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.72-0.83; p<0.001).

Conclusion: In patients with first AAMI treated with PPCI, Q/R in admission ECG may have a role as an independent predictive marker of no-reflow.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2017.10.008DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

precordial wave
12
patients acute
8
acute anterior
8
anterior myocardial
8
myocardial infarction
8
primary percutaneous
8
no-reflow group
8
patients
6
admission electrocardiographic
4
electrocardiographic parameter
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!