The de Winter ECG pattern: Distribution and morphology of ST depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The reported positive predictive value (PPV) for the "de Winter ECG pattern" to predict an acute left anterior descending artery (LAD) lesion is inconsistent. Besides, the morphology of upsloping or nonupsloping ST depression (STD) may have different significance of severity and prognostication. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE database using "de Winter" or "junctional ST-depression with tall symmetrical T-waves" or "tall T wave" or "STEMI equivalent" as the item up to March 2020. We compared the ECG differences between the different culprit arteries and various morphological STD. RESULTS: A total of 70 patients with analyzable ECGs were included. In 60 patients (LAD group), the LAD was the culprit artery, while in 10 patients (non-LAD group), there were other etiologies. Maximal STD in V2 or V3 had a PPV of 89% of all patients and 98% of patients without ST elevation in V2 to detect an acute LAD lesion. The presence of q/Q-wave or poor R-wave progression in the precordial leads was significantly more often found in patients with upsloping STD than in patients with nonupsloping STD in the LAD group (84% vs. 27%, p < .01). In 18 patients, the ECG showed a change from upsloping to nonupsloping STD from the leads with maximal STD to the surrounding leads with less STD. CONCLUSIONS: The location of the maximal STD in the precordial leads differs between patients with LAD as the culprit artery and other etiologies of the de Winter ECG pattern. Upsloping STD signifies more severe signs of ischemia than nonupsloping STD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".