Context Although previous studies have suggested that normal and nonspecific
initial electrocardiograms (ECGs) are associated with a favorable prognosis
for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), their independent predictive
value for mortality has not been examined.
Objective To compare in-hospital mortality among patients with AMI who have normal
or nonspecific initial ECGs with that of patients who have diagnostic ECGs.
Design, Setting, and Patients Multihospital observational study in which 391 208 patients with
AMI met the study criteria between June 1994 and June 2000 and had ECGs that
were normal (n = 30 759), nonspecific (n = 137 574), or diagnostic
(n = 222 875; defined as ST-segment elevation or depression and/or left
bundle-branch block). A logistic regression model was constructed using a
propensity score for ECG findings and data on demographics, medical history,
diagnostic procedures, and therapy to determine the independent prognostic
value of a normal or nonspecific initial ECG.
Main Outcome Measures In-hospital mortality; composite outcome of in-hospital death and life-threatening
adverse events.
Results In-hospital mortality rates were 5.7%, 8.7%, and 11.5% while the rates
of the composite of mortality and life-threatening adverse events were 19.2%,
27.5%, and 34.9% for the normal, nonspecific, and diagnostic ECG groups, respectively.
After adjusting for other predictor variables, the odds of mortality for the
normal ECG group was 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.63; P<.001) and for the nonspecific group was 0.70 (95%
CI, 0.68-0.72; P<.001), compared with the diagnostic
ECG group.
Conclusion In this large cohort of patients with AMI, patients presenting with
normal or nonspecific ECGs did have lower in-hospital mortality rates than
those of patients with diagnostic ECGs, yet the absolute rates were still
unexpectedly high.
Studies of patients presenting to the emergency department with chest
pain have found that a normal or nonspecific electrocardiogram (ECG) portends
a low rate of mortality and life-threatening complications.1-8
Deferred outpatient testing (within 72 hours) is therefore frequently recommended
for these low-risk patients.8,9
These studies were often carried out at single hospitals,1-4,6-8
and some have combined patients who have nonspecific ECG findings with those
who have normal ECG results.1,8
Most importantly, they all contained only a small subgroup of patients with
objectively confirmed acute myocardial infarction (AMI) who have normal initial
ECGs.
The mortality rate of patients with proven AMI and a normal initial
ECG has not been well described and may be quite high.5,7,10
A recent analysis by Pope et al10 found that
2.1% of patients with AMI were inadvertently discharged from the emergency
department. A normal ECG finding was the most likely predictor of inadvertent
discharge of these patients, and among patients sent home with AMI, the 30-day
mortality rate was 10.5%.
To date, there has been no large multihospital study of patients with
AMI that has addressed the independent prognostic value of a normal or nonspecific
initial ECG. The National Registry of Myocardial Infarction (NRMI)11 affords an opportunity to compare the risk of in-hospital
death and life-threatening complications among patients with normal and diagnostic
initial ECGs. The main objective of this study was to determine the predictive
value of the initial ECG for in-hospital mortality.
Study Population and Data Collection
The NRMI is an observational database of hospitalized patients with
confirmed AMI that was instituted in 1989. The NRMI 2 enrolled patients at
1674 hospitals from June 1994 through April 1998. This was followed by the
NRMI 3, which included data from 1553 hospitals (through June 2000).12 The data collection and results of this registry
are comparable to the those of the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project (CCP),
but the NRMI includes all payers as opposed to only Medicare beneficiaries.13
In the NRMI, the diagnosis of myocardial infarction was based on a clinical
presentation consistent with AMI and at least 1 of the following findings:
creatine kinase or creatine kinase-MB greater than or equal to twice the upper
limit of normal, electrocardiographic evidence of AMI, elevation of other
cardiac specific enzymes (NRMI 3), scintigraphic or autopsy evidence of myocardial
infarction, or a discharge diagnosis of myocardial infarction by the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical
Modification code 410.X1 (NRMI 2). For the NRMI 3, a discharge diagnosis
of myocardial infarction was required. Data were abstracted from the medical
record by a trained site study coordinator and were transcribed onto a case
report form. The case report forms were sent to StatProbe, Inc, Lexington,
Ky, and the data entered underwent multiple checks for accuracy. Any inconsistencies
or unrecorded fields were returned to the site for clarification and correction.
All ECG results coded in the NRMI database were abstracted from the final
reading found on the medical record after patient discharge.
Patients who were eligible for inclusion in this study were those entered
in the NRMI 2 (n = 772 586) and the NRMI 3 database (n = 537 444)
through June 2000 (a total of 1 310 030 patients). We excluded from analysis
all patients who were transferred to or from other facilities since we could
not always ascertain the results of the initial ECG and outcome data were
not always available (554 550 cases). Also excluded were patients who
had the first ECG obtained for reasons other than symptoms of AMI (defined
as chest pain or pressure, arm or jaw pain, dyspnea, nausea and vomiting,
syncope, and/or cardiac arrest; 22 289 cases). The percentage of nontransferred
patients diagnosed with AMI who at presentation had normal or nonspecific
initial ECGs was determined.
We excluded patients found to have Killip class III or IV heart failure
on initial presentation because these findings were part of the composite
outcome measure (77 215 cases). An additional 264 768 patients were
removed based on the following findings on the initial ECG: Q waves, right
bundle-branch block, or multiple different readings of the initial ECG (such
as ST-segment elevation and normal in the single ECG reading), or when the
results of the initial ECG were not available. The final study population
included 391 208 patients. For analysis, they were divided into 3 groups
based on the initial ECG; normal, those with nonspecific ST-segment and/or
T-wave changes, and diagnostic of AMI (defined as ST-segment elevation, ST-segment
depression, and/or left bundle-branch block).
Variables and Outcomes Measures
Registry variables collected included demographics, previous history,
presentation, treatment, procedures, complications, and in-hospital mortality.
Times from symptom onset to hospital arrival as well as other clinically important
time intervals were abstracted from the medical record. To prevent the influence
of outliers, any patient with a value greater than 72 hours was assigned a
time of 72 hours.
The main outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. A secondary outcome
was the composite of in-hospital mortality and/or adverse in-hospital events
(defined as ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation, the development of pulmonary
edema or cardiogenic shock [Killip class III or class IV heart failure], and/or
hypotension requiring intervention). No special weighting was given to each
factor in the composite outcome.
An analysis of baseline patient characteristics was conducted to compare
the 3 groups. Differences between the groups were assessed by χ2 tests for categorical variables. For continuous data, analysis of variance
and Kruskal-Wallis were used. Mortality rates as a function of the findings
on the initial ECG were compared by χ2 tests. Stratified analyses
were performed according to a number of prespecified clinical and demographic
variables. To evaluate the impact of higher presenting grades of heart failure
or ECG-related mortality differences, we reintroduced patients with Killip
class III and IV heart failure.
To assess the independent prognostic valve of the initial ECG, we generated
2 propensity scores using logistic regression to predict the likelihood of
having a normal or a nonspecific ECG vs a diagnostic ECG.14
The c statistic was calculated to determine the ability
of the model to discriminate between patients with and without diagnostic
ECGs. Relevant variables were then used to construct a series of forward logistic
regression models with in-hospital mortality as the dependent variable. The
first model incorporated the propensity score to derive the adjusted odds
for mortality with the initial ECG being the main independent variable. Subsequently,
demographics (age, sex, race), followed by prior history (smoking, hypercholesterolemia,
prior AMI, percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], or coronary artery bypass
graft surgery), presence of Killip class II heart failure on admission, infarct
location, medications administered within 24 hours (aspirin, nitroglycerin, β-blockers,
lidocaine, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, calcium channel blockers,
and antiplatelet therapies), diagnostic procedures (heart catheterization,
and echocardiographic assessment of cardiac function), and finally reperfusion
therapies (PCI or intravenous thrombolytics) were added to the model in successive
blocks.
To further evaluate our findings, the propensity scores were used to
generate 2 subsets of closely matched subjects to compare first, the normal
ECG group, and then the nonspecific ECG group with the diagnostic ECG group.14 For these matched samples, the signed rank test was
used to compare continuous data and the McNemar test was used for binary data.
The reported P values are all 2-tailed. It
must be noted that, due to the extremely large number of patients, care must
be exercised when interpreting the clinical importance of all P values. All statistical analyses were perfromed using SAS software
8.02 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).
Among all 733 191 nontransfer patients with AMI, 4.4% (32 172)
had a normal, 20.8% (152 659) had a nonspecific, and 33.6% (246 440)
had a diagnostic initial ECG. After application of other exclusion criteria,
391 208 were eligible for analysis. The mean age was 67.8 years (25th
percentile, 51.7 years; 75th percentile, 79.0 years; range, 18-107 years).
Whites accounted for 84.4% of the study population, and 59.0% of the study
patients were men. Medicare was the largest payer group (44.1%), followed
by commercial or preferred provider organizations (27.4%), health maintenance
organizations (13.6%), and Medicaid (2.9%).
Of the patients eligible for this study, 7.9% had normal, 35.1% had
nonspecific, and 57.0% had diagnostic initial ECGs. Patients with a normal
initial ECG tended to be younger, male, and had lower rates of prior myocardial
infarction and congestive heart failure (CHF) whereas patients with nonspecific
ECGs had the highest rate of prior angina, myocardial infarction, and CHF.
Conversely, patients with a normal initial ECG had higher rates of previous
PCI and hypercholesterolemia (Table 1).
There were differences between the groups noted at the time of hospitalization
(Table 2). Fewer patients with
normal or nonspecific ECGs arrived at the hospital within 6 hours of the onset
of symptoms. These same 2 groups were noted to have less typical symptoms
of myocardial infarction, less often given an admitting diagnosis of myocardial
infarction, less frequently admitted to an intensive care unit, but more often
admitted to a monitored bed. Median times from hospital arrival to obtaining
the first ECG were longer for patients with normal ECGs and nonspecific ECGs.
Hospitalization characteristics according to the baseline ECG are summarized
in Table 3. Patients with normal
or nonspecific ECGs had a much higher prevalence of non–Q-wave infarctions.
Those with normal ECGs were found to have higher mean (SD) ejection fractions:
normal, 53% (14%); nonspecific, 48% (15%); and diagnostic 47% (14%) ECGs; P<.001. Those with normal or nonspecific ECGs were less
often treated with aspirin, heparin, intravenous β-blockers, or PCI but
had similar rates of coronary artery bypass graft surgery.
In-Hospital Mortality and Life-Threatening Complications
The overall in-hospital mortality rates for the final study population
were 5.7% with normal, 8.7% with nonspecific, and 11.5% with diagnostic initial
ECGs and the composites of death and serious cardiac event rates were 19.2%,
27.5%, and 34.9%, respectively. Compared with patients with a diagnostic ECG,
the unadjusted OR for death for patients with normal ECGs was 0.47 (95% CI,
0.44-0.49; P<.001) and for nonspecific ECGs, 0.74
(95% CI, 0.72-0.75; P<.001) compared with those
with diagnostic ECGs. When death occurred it was earlier in the hospital course
among patients with diagnostic ECGs (mean, 2.5 days; interquartile range,
0.7-6.0 days) than for patients with normal (mean, 4.3 days; interquartile
range, 1.9-9.5 days) or nonspecific (mean, 4.3 days; interquartile range,
1.7-8.9 days, P<.001) ECGs. Figure 1 shows the survival distribution for patients remaining
hospitalized at the given times.
Among patients with normal or nonspecific initial ECGs, 20.1% and 18.4%,
respectively, developed frank ST-segment elevation or left bundle-branch block
on subsequent ECGs, and these patients had mortality rates of 9.2% and 12.3%,
respectively. For patients with normal initial ECGs, those having a prior
history of cardiac disease had a 5.8% mortality rate, which was not significantly
different from patients without a history of cardiac disease (5.7%, P = .70) and (although statistically significant) clinically
this was true for the patients with nonspecific ECGs (8.4% vs 8.9%, P<.001). However, among patients with diagnostic ECGs,
the mortality for those with prior cardiac disease was slightly higher (12.5%
vs 11.1%, P<.001) than for those without prior
cardiac disease.
The addition of patients presenting with Killip class III or class IV
heart failure had only minimal effect on in-hospital mortality for the normal
ECG group, a small effect on those with nonspecific ECGs but a more pronounced
effect on patients with diagnostic ECGs (normal, 6.2%; nonspecific, 9.8%;
and diagnostic, 13.6%). This is, in part, due to the relatively small fraction
of patients with normal initial ECGs who present with higher Killip classes
of heart failure (4.5%) vs patients with nonspecific (9.9%) or diagnostic
initial ECGs (9.6%).
When examining the mortality among subgroups of patients with certain
clinical characteristics in the various ECG groups, it was noted that the
lack of chest pain as a presenting symptom, age greater than 75 years, tachycardia,
and Killip class II heart failure on presentation were among the factors associated
with increased mortality rates. However, for patients who were younger than
65 years (particularly men) or had ejection fractions of 40% or higher, a
normal ECG predicted a low in-hospital mortality rate (Table 4).
Logistic Regression Model and Matched Pairs Analysis
After adjusting for propensity score and all variables in our model,
a normal initial ECG remained a strong predictor of a lower mortality rate
(adjusted OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.56-0.63; P<.001)
as was a nonspecific ECG (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.68-0.72; P<.001) (Table 5). The c statistics for the propensity score derivations were
0.82 and 0.78, and the c statistics for the final
model were 0.85 for the normal and 0.83 for the nonspecific ECG groups.
After propensity score matching, the many baseline differences between
groups largely disappeared (Table 6).
The matched normal and diagnostic ECG groups were found to have in-hospital
mortality rates of 5.7% and 9.5%, respectively (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.54-0.61; P<.001). For the matched nonspecific and diagnostic
ECG groups, the respective mortality rates were 8.7% and 12.5% (OR, 0.67;
95% CI 0.65-0.69; P<.001).
Our study has shown that for patients with AMI, those with normal or
nonspecific initial ECGs had lower but clinically significant short-term mortality
rates compared with those with diagnostic ECGs. Analysis of variables possibly
predictive of the outcome had a small impact on the adjusted OR. For patients
with AMI, a normal initial ECG was associated with a 41% lower risk of in-hospital
death.
The unexpected finding of this study was that patients with an initially
normal ECG had a substantial mortality rate, one that approximates the 30-day
risk for patients with ST-segment elevation treated in recent trials of reperfusion
therapies. Patients with nonspecific ECGs had a mortality rate in excess of
those in the same clinical trials.15-18
Our results demonstrate that, for patients with AMI, a normal or nonspecific
initial ECG does not always indicate that the patient will have a favorable
hospital course. This is underscored by the rate of combined mortality and
potentially life-threatening adverse events (normal, 19.2%; nonspecific, 27.5%)
experienced by these groups. Our findings are in contrast to other smaller
studies of patients with a normal or nonspecific initial ECG.1-8
Of particular interest is our identification of 2 subgroups of patients with
a normal ECG who did have a very low mortality (Table 4): men younger than 65 years and those patients with an ejection
fraction of 40% or greater.
Prior studies have determined that a normal or nonspecific initial ECG
in the setting of possible acute cardiac ischemia carries a favorable prognosis1-8
and minor ECG changes are predictive of a good outcome among patients with
unstable coronary syndromes.19,20
In contrast, Zalenski et al21 found that for
patients with AMI who have a benign initial ECG, those who later develop diagnostic
ECGs are more prone to in-hospital life-threatening complications. Our study
confirmed this and showed the mortality rate for patients with a normal initial
ECG who later develop ST-segment elevation or left bundle-branch block was
9.2% and among patients with initial nonspecific ECGs who developed the same
findings, the mortality rate was higher (12.3%) than that of patients who
presented with diagnostic ECGs. Thus, abnormalities found on subsequent ECGs
help define the patient's risk of death.
It is worthwhile exploring why the mortality rate of our cohort of patients
with normal initial ECGs is similar to that of patients with diagnostic ECGs
treated in clinical trials. The NRMI study population is drawn from a broad
spectrum of hospitals and therefore may be more representative of patients
with AMI. Clinical trials are commonly performed at higher-volume institutions
that have more experience treating AMI and perform more cardiac procedures
(factors associated with lower mortality rates).22-24
Many of our patients may have had comorbid illness or informed consent issues
that would have excluded them from clinical trials. There were delays in seeking
medical care among patients with normal initial ECGs that can negatively influence
outcome.15,25,26
Patients with normal or nonspecific ECGs presented with chest pain less frequently
than did patients with diagnostic ECGs. A recent study has shown that patients
with AMI but had no chest pain delay seeking medical care, receive less aggressive
care, and have significantly increased mortality rates.27
Patients with AMI who present with a normal ECG were less often treated with
aspirin, heparin, and β-blockers. Finally, a strategy of very early catheterization
and PCI in patients with AMI and non–ST-segment elevation ECGs may be
associated with better outcomes.28,29
Our observations of the prognosis and the relative undertreatment of these
patients indicate there may be significant opportunity for more aggressive
therapy with the hope of improved outcomes.
Our results also have implications for the approximately 2% to 4% of
patients with AMI who are inadvertently discharged from the emergency department.10,30 The rate of inappropriate discharge
has been shown to be 7.7 times more likely for patients with normal initial
ECGs.10 These patients sustain short-term mortality
rates of 10.5% to 26%5,10,30
and have a risk-adjusted mortality ratio of 1.9 times those of patients with
AMI who are not discharged.10 A strategy of
using several biomarkers of myocardial necrosis may help identify these at-risk
patients.31
Limitations of this study include that the ECG data abstracted from
the medical record were not examined by a core laboratory. Electrocardiogram
results were obtained from the final reading found on the chart after hospital
discharge. These readings are most commonly physician edited computerized
ECG readings. The computerized ECG reading of "normal" is highly reliable,
identifying normal ECGs correctly in 99.4% to 100% of cases.32,33
For patients with suspected AMI, a computer-interpreted ECG can effectively
screen for thrombolytic candidates.34 Computer
assisted ECG readings improved the concordance of the physician's reading
with the expert reading,35 and it is very efficient
and cost effective for large population-based research.36
The inclusion of multiple different hospitals and ECG interpretation by computer
and different physicians allows for good generalization of our ECG findings.
Other limitations must be considered. The NRMI database does not contain
measures for infarct size determinations; therefore, we could not incorporate
these variables into the model. Many patients did not have ejection fractions
determined during hospitalization. The use of additional ECG leads was used
in only 0.8% of patients; however, right-side leads are primarily used to
detect right ventricular infarction associated with inferior ST-segment elevation37 and posterior leads are unlikely to show significant
abnormalities in the absence of anterior ST-segment depression.38
Newer technologies, such as continuous ST-segment monitoring, facilitate the
diagnosis of AMI,39 but these technologies
were not considered herein. Finally, we were unable to perform a competing
risk analysis of our composite end point due to data limitations.
In 1998, more than 5.3 million patients sought emergency care for chest
pain or related symptoms.40 In many centers,
"low-risk" chest pain patients are evaluated in emergency department–based
chest pain units.41,42 The initial
ECG is the first and most effective tool used for risk-stratification of patients
with symptoms suggestive of AMI.43 It is therefore
important to understand its prognostic value and to be aware of the actual
absolute risks for those patients with proven AMI. Our results underscore
the finding that the favorable prognosis of a normal ECG in chest pain patients
is not conferred to those with confirmed AMI, though patients with AMI and
a normal or nonspecific initial ECG are at lower risk for in-hospital death
or serious complications than those with diagnostic ECGs. Future work will
be needed to define optimal management strategies for patients with AMI who
present with initially normal or nonspecific ECGs.
1.Brush Jr JE, Brand DA, Acampora D, Chalmer B, Wackers FJ. Use of the initial electrocardiogram to predict in-hospital complications
of acute myocardial infarction.
N Engl J Med.1985;312:1137-1141.Google Scholar 2.Lee TH, Cook EF, Weisberg M, Sargent RK, Wilson C, Goldman L. Acute chest pain in the emergency room: identification and examination
of low-risk patients.
Arch Intern Med.1985;145:65-69.Google Scholar 3.Slater DK, Hlatky MA, Mark DB, Harrell Jr FE, Pryor DB, Califf RM. Outcome in suspected acute myocardial infarction with normal or minimally
abnormal admission electrocardiographic findings.
Am J Cardiol.1987;60:766-770.Google Scholar 4.Fesmire FM, Percy RF, Wears RL, MacMath TL. Risk stratification according to the initial electrocardiogram in patients
with suspected acute myocardial infarction.
Arch Intern Med.1989;149:1294-1297.Google Scholar 5.Rouan GW, Lee TH, Cook EF, Brand DA, Weisberg MC, Goldman L. Clinical characteristics and outcome of acute myocardial infarction
in patients with initially normal or nonspecific electrocardiograms: a report
from the Multicenter Chest Pain Study.
Am J Cardiol.1989;64:1087-1092.Google Scholar 6.Karlson BW, Herlitz J, Wiklund O, Richter A, Hjalmarson A. Early prediction of acute myocardial infarction from clinical history,
examination and electrocardiogram in the emergency room.
Am J Cardiol.1991;68:171-175.Google Scholar 7.Zalenski RJ, Sloan EP, Chen EH, Hayden RF, Gold IW, Cooke D. The emergency department ECG and immediately life-threatening complications
in initially uncomplicated suspected myocardial ischemia.
Ann Emerg Med.1988;17:221-226.Google Scholar 8.McCullough PA, Ayad O, O'Neill WW, Goldstein JA. Costs and outcomes of patients admitted with chest pain and essentially
normal electrocardiograms.
Clin Cardiol.1998;21:22-26.Google Scholar 9.Braunwald E, Mark DB, Jones RH.
et al. Unstable Angina: Diagnosis and Management. Rockville, Md: US Dept of Health and Human Services, Public Health
Services, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; March 1994. Clinical
Practice Guideline No. 10. AHCPR publication 94-0602.
10.Pope JH, Aufderheide TP, Ruthazer R.
et al. Missed diagnoses of acute cardiac ischemia in the emergency department.
N Engl J Med.2000;342:1163-1170.Google Scholar 11.Rogers WJ, Bowlby LJ, Chandra NC.
et al. Treatment of myocardial infarction in the United States (1990 to 1993):
observations from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction.
Circulation.1994;90:2103-2114.Google Scholar 12.Rogers WJ, Canto JG, Lambrew CT.
et al. Temporal trends in the treatment of over 1.5 million patients with
myocardial infarction in the US from 1990 through 1999: the National Registry
of Myocardial Infarction 1, 2 and 3.
J Am Coll Cardiol.2000;36:2056-2063.Google Scholar 13.Every NR, Frederick PD, Robinson M, Sugarman J, Bowlby L, Barron HV. A comparison of the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2 with
the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project.
J Am Coll Cardiol.1999;33:1886-1894.Google Scholar 14.Rosenbaum P, Rubin D. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for
causal effects.
Biometrika.1983;70:41-55.Google Scholar 15.The GUSTO investigators. An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies
for acute myocardial infarction.
N Engl J Med.1993;329:673-682.Google Scholar 16.Cannon CP, McCabe CH, Diver DJ.
et al. Comparison of front-loaded recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator,
anistreplase and combination thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction:
results of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 4 trial.
J Am Coll Cardiol.1994;24:1602-1610.Google Scholar 17.The Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries in
Acute Coronary Syndromes (GUSTO IIb) Angioplasty Substudy Investigators. A clinical trial comparing primary coronary angioplasty with tissue
plasminogen activator for acute myocardial infarction.
N Engl J Med.1997;336:1621-1628.Google Scholar 18.Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Thrombolytic Investigators. Single-bolus tenecteplase compared with front-loaded alteplase in acute
myocardial infarction: the ASSENT-2 double-blind randomised trial.
Lancet.1999;354:716-722.Google Scholar 19.Savonitto S, Ardissino D, Granger CB.
et al. Prognostic value of the admission electrocardiogram in acute coronary
syndromes.
JAMA.1999;281:707-713.Google Scholar 20.Holmvang L, Clemmensen P, Wagner G, Grande P. Admission standard electrocardiogram for early risk stratification
in patients with unstable coronary artery disease not eligible for acute revascularization
therapy: a TRIM substudy.
Am Heart J.1999;137:24-33.Google Scholar 21.Zalenski RJ, Rydman RJ, Sloan EP, Caceres L, Murphy DG, Cooke D. The emergency department electrocardiogram and hospital complications
in myocardial infarction patients.
Acad Emerg Med.1996;3:318-325.Google Scholar 22.Thiemann DR, Coresh J, Oetgen WJ, Powe NR. The association between hospital volume and survival after acute myocardial
infarction in elderly patients.
N Engl J Med.1999;340:1640-1648.Google Scholar 23.Canto JG, Every NR, Magid DJ.
et al. for the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2 Investigators. The volume of primary angioplasty procedures and survival after acute
myocardial infarction.
N Engl J Med.2000;342:1573-1580.Google Scholar 24.Hannan EL, Racz M, Ryan TJ.
et al. Coronary angioplasty volume-outcome relationships for hospitals and
cardiologists.
JAMA.1997;277:892-898.Google Scholar 25.Newby LK, Rutsch WR, Califf RM.
et al. for the GUSTO-1 Investigators. Time from symptom onset to treatment and outcomes after thrombolytic
therapy.
J Am Coll Cardiol.1996;27:1646-1655.Google Scholar 26.Goldberg RJ, Mooradd M, Gurwitz JH.
et al. Impact of time to treatment with tissue plasminogen activator on morbidity
and mortality following acute myocardial infarction: the second National Registry
of Myocardial Infarction.
Am J Cardiol.1998;82:259-264.Google Scholar 27.Canto JG, Shlipak MG, Rogers WJ.
et al. Prevalence, clinical characteristics, and mortality among patients
with myocardial infarction presenting without chest pain.
JAMA.2000;283:3223-3229.Google Scholar 28.Scull GS, Martin JS, Weaver WD, Every NR.for the MITI Investigators. Early angiography versus conservative treatment in patients with non-ST
elevation acute myocardial infarction.
J Am Coll Cardiol.2000;35:895-902.Google Scholar 29.Cannon CP, Weintraub WS, Demopoulos LA.
et al. Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients
with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor
tirofiban.
N Engl J Med.2001;344:1879-1887.Google Scholar 30.Lee TH, Rouan GW, Weisberg MC.
et al. Clinical characteristics and natural history of patients with acute
myocardial infarction sent home from the emergency room.
Am J Cardiol.1987;60:219-224.Google Scholar 31.Newby LK, Storrow AB, Gibler WB.
et al. Bedside multimarker testing for risk stratification in chest pain units:
the Chest Pain Evaluation by Creatine Kinase-mb, Myoglobin, and Troponin I
(CHECKMATE) Study.
Circulation.2001;103:1832-1837.Google Scholar 32.Nordgaard-Andersen I. Automatic computerized ECG interpretation.
Ugeskr Laeger.1991;153:1049-1051.Google Scholar 33.Saner H, Lindeland A, Scallen R, Paule W, Lange HW, Gobel FL. Comparison of 3 ECG computer programs with interpretation by physicians.
Schweiz Med Wochenschr.1987;117:1035-1039.Google Scholar 34.Kudenchuk PJ, Ho MT, Weaver WD.
et al. for the MITI Project Investigators. Accuracy of computer-interpreted electrocardiography in selecting patients
for thrombolytic therapy.
J Am Coll Cardiol.1991;17:1486-1491.Google Scholar 35.Brailer DJ, Kroch E, Pauly MV. The impact of computer-assisted test interpretation on physician decision
making: the case of electrocardiograms.
Med Decis Making.1997;17:80-86.Google Scholar 36.de Bruyne MC, Kors JA, Hoes AW.
et al. Diagnostic interpretation of electrocardiograms in population-based
research: computer program research physicians, or cardiologists?
J Clin Epidemiol.1997;50:947-952.Google Scholar 37.Andersen HR, Falk E, Nielsen D. Right ventricular infarction: frequency, size and topography in coronary
heart disease: a prospective study comprising 107 consecutive autopsies from
a coronary care unit.
J Am Coll Cardiol.1987;10:1223-1232.Google Scholar 38.Zalenski RJ, Rydman RJ, Sloan EP.
et al. Value of posterior and right ventricular leads in comparison to the
standard 12-lead electrocardiogram in evaluation of ST-segment elevation in
suspected acute myocardial infarction.
Am J Cardiol.1997;79:1579-1585.Google Scholar 39.Fesmire FM, Percy RF, Bardoner JB, Wharton DR, Calhoun FB. Usefulness of automated serial 12-lead ECG monitoring during the initial
emergency department evaluation of patients with chest pain.
Ann Emerg Med.1998;31:3-11.Google Scholar 40.McCaig LF. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 1998 emergency department
summary.
Adv Data.2000:1-23.Google Scholar 41.Roberts RR, Zalenski RJ, Mensah EK.
et al. Costs of an emergency department-based accelerated diagnostic protocol
vs hospitalization in patients with chest pain: a randomized controlled trial.
JAMA.1997;278:1670-1676.Google Scholar 42.Lee TH, Goldman L. Evaluation of the patient with acute chest pain.
N Engl J Med.2000;342:1187-1195.Google Scholar 43.Goldman L, Cook EF, Johnson PA, Brand DA, Rouan GW, Lee TH. Prediction of the need for intensive care in patients who come to the
emergency departments with acute chest pain.
N Engl J Med.1996;334:1498-1504.Google Scholar