Prehospital ECG Interpretation Methods for ST-Elevation MI Detection and Catheterization Laboratory Activation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 2 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2025-05-22 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.22037/aaemj.v13i1.2627
Ahmad Alrawashdeh, Samar Ihtoub, Zaid I Alkhatib, Mahmoud Alwidyan, Yousef S Khader, Sukaina Rawashdeh, Saeed Alqahtani, Dion Stub, Rahaf Alhamouri, Islam E Alkhazali, Ziad Nehme
{"title":"Prehospital ECG Interpretation Methods for ST-Elevation MI Detection and Catheterization Laboratory Activation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Ahmad Alrawashdeh, Samar Ihtoub, Zaid I Alkhatib, Mahmoud Alwidyan, Yousef S Khader, Sukaina Rawashdeh, Saeed Alqahtani, Dion Stub, Rahaf Alhamouri, Islam E Alkhazali, Ziad Nehme","doi":"10.22037/aaemj.v13i1.2627","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The diagnostic accuracies of different electrocardiography (ECG) interpretation methods remain unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of prehospital 12-lead ECG interpretation methods for identifying ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and activating cardiac catheterization laboratories (CCLs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search was conducted in Medline, Scopus, and CINAHL databases up to August 2024. Two reviewers independently selected studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of prehospital 12-lead ECG in real-time STEMI identification and CCL activation. Pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated using bivariate generalized mixed-effects regression models or random-effects meta-analysis as appropriate. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-six studies involving 67,168 patients were included. Overall, for STEMI identification, the pooled AUC of ECG was 0.96 (95%CI:0.94-0.98), sensitivity was 80% (95% CI, 69-88%), specificity was 97% (95%CI: 94-98%), and DOR was 114 (95%CI: 59-222). Ambulance clinicians achieved the highest DOR (264; 95%CI: 33-2125), followed by transmission method (136; 95%CI, 59-312) and computer-assisted analysis (78; 95%CI: 33-186). Transmission method demonstrated superior specificity (‎0.98; 95%CI: 0.94-0.99‎) and the lowest rates of inappropriate (13.2%; 95% CI: ‎8.6%-19.2%), and false-positive (11.0%; 95%CI: 6.9%-15.0%) CCL activations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All prehospital ECG interpretation methods yielded acceptable diagnostic accuracy for STEMI identification; however, transmission offered the greatest specificity and fewer unnecessary CCL activations. Adopting transmission-based strategies, where feasible, and enhancing training and decision support for ambulance clinicians may improve prehospital STEMI detection and resource utilization.</p>","PeriodicalId":8146,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine","volume":"13 1","pages":"e47"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12145131/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22037/aaemj.v13i1.2627","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The diagnostic accuracies of different electrocardiography (ECG) interpretation methods remain unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of prehospital 12-lead ECG interpretation methods for identifying ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and activating cardiac catheterization laboratories (CCLs).

Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in Medline, Scopus, and CINAHL databases up to August 2024. Two reviewers independently selected studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of prehospital 12-lead ECG in real-time STEMI identification and CCL activation. Pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated using bivariate generalized mixed-effects regression models or random-effects meta-analysis as appropriate. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool.

Results: Thirty-six studies involving 67,168 patients were included. Overall, for STEMI identification, the pooled AUC of ECG was 0.96 (95%CI:0.94-0.98), sensitivity was 80% (95% CI, 69-88%), specificity was 97% (95%CI: 94-98%), and DOR was 114 (95%CI: 59-222). Ambulance clinicians achieved the highest DOR (264; 95%CI: 33-2125), followed by transmission method (136; 95%CI, 59-312) and computer-assisted analysis (78; 95%CI: 33-186). Transmission method demonstrated superior specificity (‎0.98; 95%CI: 0.94-0.99‎) and the lowest rates of inappropriate (13.2%; 95% CI: ‎8.6%-19.2%), and false-positive (11.0%; 95%CI: 6.9%-15.0%) CCL activations.

Conclusion: All prehospital ECG interpretation methods yielded acceptable diagnostic accuracy for STEMI identification; however, transmission offered the greatest specificity and fewer unnecessary CCL activations. Adopting transmission-based strategies, where feasible, and enhancing training and decision support for ambulance clinicians may improve prehospital STEMI detection and resource utilization.

院前心电图解释方法st段抬高心肌梗死检测和导管实验室激活:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
不同的心电图(ECG)解释方法的诊断准确性尚不清楚。因此,本研究旨在系统评价和比较院前12导联心电图解释方法对st段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)和激活心导管实验室(ccl)的诊断准确性。方法:综合检索截至2024年8月的Medline、Scopus和CINAHL数据库。两位评论者独立选择了评估院前12导联心电图在实时STEMI识别和CCL激活中的诊断准确性的研究。敏感性、特异性、诊断优势比(DOR)和曲线下面积(AUC)的综合估计采用双变量广义混合效应回归模型或随机效应荟萃分析进行计算。使用QUADAS-2工具评估纳入研究的质量。结果:纳入36项研究,涉及67168例患者。总体而言,STEMI的心电图合并AUC为0.96 (95%CI:0.94-0.98),敏感性为80% (95%CI: 69-88%),特异性为97% (95%CI: 94-98%), DOR为114 (95%CI: 59-222)。救护车临床医生的DOR最高(264;95%CI: 33-2125),其次是传输法(136;95%CI, 59-312)和计算机辅助分析(78;95%置信区间:33 - 186)。透射法表现出优越的特异性(> 0.98;95%CI: 0.94-0.99),不适宜率最低(13.2%;95% CI: 8.6%-19.2%),假阳性(11.0%;95%CI: 6.9%-15.0%) CCL活化。结论:院前心电图解读方法对STEMI的诊断准确率均可接受;然而,传播提供了最大的特异性和更少的不必要的CCL激活。在可行的情况下,采用基于传播的策略,加强对救护车临床医生的培训和决策支持,可能会改善院前STEMI检测和资源利用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine
Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
7.40%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信