You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Correspondence
A comparison of ECG scores for area at risk
  1. Yang Timothy Du,
  2. Sivabaskari Pasupathy,
  3. Christopher Neil,
  4. John F Beltrame
  1. Discipline of Medicine, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Professor John Beltrame, Discipline of Medicine, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, c/o Ward 5B, TQEH, 28 Woodville Rd, Woodville South, Adelaide, South Australia 5011, Australia; john.beltrame{at}adelaide.edu.au

https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2012-302187

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    To the Editor: Versteylen et al1 recently evaluated several area at risk (AAR) methods in patients with acute ST elevation myocardial infarction using four physiological principles, and concluded that cardiac MRI methods outperform angiographic methods, which are better than ECG methods. However, this study used the antiquated Aldrich score, rather than the updated ECG index, described by Wilkins et al.2

    The Aldrich score is based upon the extent of inferior ST elevation …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Linked article 302269.

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles

    • PostScript
      The Authors' reply
      Mathijs O Versteylen Sebastiaan C A M Bekkers Martijn W Smulders Raymond J Kim Anton P M Gorgels
      Heart 2012; 98 1257-1258 Published Online First: 26 Jun 2012. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2012-302269