This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

James T. Willerson, MD; Robert W. Parkey, MD; L. Maximilian Buja, MD; Frederick J. Bonte, MD

JAMA. 1977;238(15):1665-1666.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

One might logically question whether there is a need for additional techniques to recognize the presence of acute myocardial infarcts in patients. Traditionally, the ECG and serum measurement of cardiac enzymes have been used to detect the presence or absence of acute myocardial necrosis resulting from coronary artery disease. For recognizing acute myocardial infarcts, these techniques are adequate in many patients, providing an absolute differentiation between the presence of acute myocardial infarction and other coronary artery disease syndromes, including angina pectoris and acute myocardial ischemia. However, there are subgroups of patients who come to the hospital with chest pain, in whom it is difficult to determine with accuracy whether they have had acute myocardial infarcts when just the ECG and cardiac enzymes are used alone.

In particular, patients who arrive at the hospital 16 or more hours after the onset of chest pain, those with conduction abnormalities on their ECG, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
University of Texas Southwestern Medical School and Parkland Memorial Hospital Dallas

Footnotes
Address editorial communications to the Editor, 535 N Dearborn St, Chicago 60610

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?