There is one rather glaring, but inconsequential, error in the article. I’m interested to see if you pick up on it, so I won’t say what it is yet.
And, of course, we will publish an erratum later, unless there is a letter to the editor to which we will respond.
Don’t forget:
Dr. Smith’s ECG Blog will be live online at 1:30 PM Central Time on
Thursday, Nov. 29, 2012. Video will be broadcast directly on the blog site,
and you may call in to ask a question using Skype. The Skype ID is: smithecg
All I noted was that Fig3a calculated the ST/S ratio to be "2/23=0.087", which should be 2/-23=-0.087 if the S-wave depth measurements are to be kept consistent. Fig3b uses the consistent S-wave depth notation (i.e. negative millimeters).
I had not noticed that one!
Interesting article, dr Smith!
I'm not sure what the inconsequential error is.. Could it be that you called the measured proportion "ST/S ratio" although you actually measured the ST/R ratio in the leads were the QRS-complexes were positive?
One question.. Isn't de Winter T-waves considered to be a STEMI equivalent?
No, that is not the error.
As for de Winter's waves: yes, they happen with LAD occlusion and are definitely STEMI-equivalents
Thanks,
Steve Smith
Has this been peer reviewed yet
of course. that's why it is published in Annals.