Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of ST-segment elevation on a 12‑lead ECG in detecting ACO across any coronary artery, challenging the current STEMI-NSTEMI paradigm.
Methods: Studies from MEDLINE and Scopus (2012-2023) comparing ECG findings with coronary angiograms were systematically reviewed and analyzed following PRISMA-DTA guidelines. QUADAS-2 assessed the risk of bias.
Study selection: Studies included focused on AMI patients and provided data enabling the construction of contingency tables for sensitivity and specificity calculation, excluding those with non-ACS conditions, outdated STEMI criteria, or a specific focus on bundle branch blocks or other complex diagnoses. Data were extracted systematically and pooled test accuracy estimates were computed using MetaDTA software, employing bivariate analyses for within- and between-study variation. The primary outcomes measured were the sensitivity and specificity of ST-segment elevation in detecting ACO.
Results: Three studies with 23,704 participants were included. The pooled sensitivity of ST-segment elevation for detecting ACO was 43.6% (95% CI: 34.7%-52.9%), indicating that over half of ACO cases may not exhibit ST-segment elevation. The specificity was 96.5% (95% CI: 91.2%-98.7%). Additional analysis using the OMI-NOMI strategy showed improved sensitivity (78.1%, 95% CI: 62.7%-88.3%) while maintaining similar specificity (94.4%, 95% CI: 88.6%-97.3%).
Conclusion: The findings reveal a significant diagnostic gap in the current STEMI-NSTEMI paradigm, with over half of ACO cases potentially lacking ST-segment elevation. The OMI-NOMI strategy could offer an improved diagnostic approach. The high heterogeneity and limited number of studies necessitate cautious interpretation and further research in diverse settings.
Keywords: Coronary occlusion; Electrocardiography; Myocardial infarction; Sensitivity; Specificity.
Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.