Differentiating electrocardiographic indications of massive and submassive pulmonary embolism: A cross‐sectional study in Southern Iran from 2015 to 2020

AbstractBackgroundAlthough using electrocardiogram (ECG) for pulmonary embolism (PE) risk stratification has shown mixed results, it is currently used as supplementary evidence in risk stratification. This cross‐sectional study aimed to assess and compare ECG findings of massive and submassive PE versus segmental PE.MethodsThis cross‐sectional study included 250 hospitalized patients with a confirmed diagnosis of acute PE from 2015 to 2020 in Southern Iran. Demographic variables, clinical data, troponin levels, on‐admission ECG findings, echocardiography findings, and ECG findings 24 h after receiving anticoagulants or thrombolytics were extracted.ResultsPatients diagnosed with submassive or massive PE exhibited significantly higher rates of right axis deviation (p = .010), abnormal ST segment (p < .0001), S1Q3T3 pattern (p < .0001), inverted T wave in leads V1–V3 (p < .0001), inverted T wave in leads V4–V6 (p < .0001), and inverted T wave in leads V1‐V6 (p < .0001). In a multivariable model, inverted T wave in leads V1–V3, inverted T wave in leads V4–V6, pulse rate, and positive troponin test were the statistically independent variables for predicting submassive or massive PE. Furthermore, inverted T wave in leads V1–V3 (sensitivity: 85%, specificity: 95%, accuracy: 93%, AUC: 0.902) and troponin levels (sensitivity: 72%, specificity: 86%, accuracy: 83%, AUC: 0.792) demonstrated the best diagnostic test performance for discriminating submassive or massive PE from segmental PE.ConclusionIn addition to clinical rules, ECG can serve as an ancillary tool for assessing more invasive testing and earlier aggressive treatments among patients with PE, as it can provide valuable information for the diagnosis and risk stratification of submassive or massive PE.