Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
G Sodeck a Department of
Emergency Medicine, Vienna General Hospital, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, A-1093 Vienna, Austria, b Department of Radiology, Vienna General Hospital Correspondence to: H
Domanovits hans.domanovits@akh-wien.ac.at
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Last week we presented the case of Peter Hartl, a heavy
smoker with a history of hypertension, who went to his local emergency department complaining of severe chest pain. His electrocardiograph suggested myocardial ischaemia. We invited responses on bmj.com about
the differential diagnosis, further investigations, and how to respond
to his wife's concern. To look at the rapid responses and discussion
of the case so far go to bmj.com (BMJ
2003;326:920)
| Table Removed (Available Only in the Full Text) |
Because he had severe symptoms and inconclusive electrocardiographic
findings, he had transthoracic echocardiographic ultrasonography to
confirm acute myocardial ischaemia. Motion of the ventricular wall was
normal, but he had mild aortic valve insufficiency and severe left
ventricular concentric hypertrophy (interventricular septal thickness
14 mm). His global left ventricular function was normal, and there was
no pericardial effusion. As there were no echocardiographic signs of
cardiac ischaemia, he was not given systemic thrombolytic
drugs.
|
Questions
1 What would you do next and why? 2 What issues does this case raise for cardiovascular risk management in primary care? Click to answer these questions. |
Results from the blood tests taken
Read all Rapid Responses