Tell me about these ECG

20732.jpg

analyse_media

Reading File

Finding Sources

Searching the Web

ECG interpretation widespread ST-T abnormality nonspecific causes sinus tachycardia female 47

ECG Overview

Patient: Helena Murmu, 47-year-old female Recorded: 2026-08-18, 04:44:11 Device: Mindray, 25 mm/s, 10 mm/mV, 50 Hz filter

Automated Measurements

Parameter	Value	Comment
Ventricular rate	141 bpm	Tachycardic
PR interval	114 ms	Normal (120-200 ms is typical, this is slightly short but not pathologic)
QRS duration	78 ms	Normal (narrow complex)
QT/QTc	292/434 ms	QTc borderline-high for a woman (upper normal ~450-460 ms), not frankly prolonged
P/QRS/T axes	70°/75°/48°	Normal frontal-plane axes

Machine Interpretation

Probable sinus tachycardia
Widespread ST-T abnormality, may be due to myocardial ischemia
Overall read: Abnormal ECG, flagged as "Unconfirmed Diagnosis" (i.e., not yet reviewed/signed off by a physician)

What This Means

1. Sinus tachycardia (rate 141 bpm) A narrow QRS with a normal PR interval and a rate this high in a 47-year-old is consistent with sinus tachycardia, though at 141 bpm it's worth confirming that discrete, upright P waves precede every QRS with a 1:1 relationship (the tracing quality/baseline wander in this photo makes P waves hard to confirm in every lead). Common causes include pain, anxiety, fever, hypovolemia, anemia, thyrotoxicosis, stimulant/drug effect, or a compensatory response to hemodynamic stress. Per Goldman-Cecil and Harrison's, sinus tachycardia with nonspecific ST-T changes together should prompt a search for an underlying physiologic stressor before assuming primary cardiac ischemia (Goldman-Cecil Medicine, ECG chapter; Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine, 22e).

2. Widespread ST-T abnormality The algorithm's ischemia flag is a nonspecific statement, not a diagnosis. Textbook sources are consistent that ST-T changes seen across many leads can result from:

True myocardial ischemia (the important "cannot miss" possibility)
Rate-related repolarization changes purely from tachycardia itself (junctional ST depression is a recognized artifact of fast rates)
Electrolyte disturbances, hypoxia, or acid-base derangement
LV hypertrophy/strain, drug effects (e.g., digoxin), or autonomic/adrenergic surge (pain, anxiety)
Technical artifact - baseline wander, poor electrode contact, or muscle tremor, which is visible in this tracing and can distort the ST segment measurement

As the ECG Learning Center note in the library puts it, "the specificity of ST-T ... abnormalities is provided more by the clinical circumstances ... than by the particular changes themselves" - meaning this finding must be interpreted alongside symptoms (chest pain, dyspnea), risk factors, and biomarkers, not read in isolation.

3. Intervals/axis QRS duration, PR interval, and QRS axis are all normal, arguing against bundle branch block, WPW, or significant conduction disease as the driver of the ST-T changes. The QTc (434 ms) is at the upper edge of normal for a woman, which is also consistent with a repolarization abnormality but not diagnostic of anything specific on its own.

Bottom Line

This tracing shows sinus tachycardia at 141 bpm with diffuse ST-T changes that the machine algorithm flags as possibly ischemic, but the report itself is unsigned/unconfirmed. Given the significant baseline artifact visible in the image, a repeat ECG with clean electrode contact and the patient still is the first practical step. Clinically, this pattern warrants correlation with:

Symptoms (chest pain, dyspnea, palpitations)
Vital signs (the pulse/BP notation on the paper appears inconsistent with the 141 bpm on the strip - worth rechecking)
Cardiac biomarkers (troponin) if there is any concern for acute coronary syndrome
Electrolytes, thyroid function, and volume status as causes of sinus tachycardia

I don't have this patient's clinical context (why the ECG was obtained, symptoms, history), so I can't confirm or exclude ischemia - that determination requires a clinician correlating this tracing with the bedside presentation, prior ECGs for comparison, and labs. If there was a prior baseline ECG, comparing the ST-T segments to that would be the most useful next step.

A quick check of recent literature (2 years, systematic reviews/meta-analyses) on "nonspecific ST-T changes" didn't surface anything that contradicts this standard interpretive framework - the guidance above from Goldman-Cecil, Harrison's, and the ECG Learning Center remains current.

This is a shared conversation. Sign in to Orris to start your own chat.