the 100% directionless thread

StCEMT said:
Started a cut however long ago since the gym has been closed down. Seemed to be a good reason to go and start. Probably gonna drop 25lbs total and then slowly build it back up. Not too much more to go fortunately, but squats, clean and jerks, and all that stuff is probably gonna get trashed because of all this. Going out west to hunt again this year and can't get my *** kicked like last year. 8 mile ruck to start the day and gonna end the night with a 3ish mile run + bodyweight workout.
Click to expand...
Mulies, Elk?
 
DragonClaw said:
Mulies, Elk?
Click to expand...
I think he might be hunting for...
Jackalope+2.jpg


The elusive Jackalope...
 
DragonClaw said:
??
Click to expand...
Supraventricular describes any bradycardia that originates above the heart. Sinus bradycardia would be a supraventricular bradycardia. We say supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) because we cannot recognize which rhythm it is. A lot of people mistakenly believe SVT is a rhythm when they are actually thinking of AVNRT.
 
Aprz said:
Supraventricular describes any bradycardia that originates above the heart. Sinus bradycardia would be a supraventricular bradycardia. We say supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) because we cannot recognize which rhythm it is. A lot of people mistakenly believe SVT is a rhythm when they are actually thinking of AVNRT.
Click to expand...

I kinda got the first half. SVT means it could be several rhythms. Why can't it be distinguished? Which could it be?

Wear is AVNRT?
 
DragonClaw said:
I kinda got the first half. SVT means it could be several rhythms. Why can't it be distinguished? Which could it be?

Wear is AVNRT?
Click to expand...
JET, AVNRT, WPW, LGL, Flutter, Fib...

It can be essentially impossible to differentiate origin with a heart rate of 220-300+

AV nodal reentry tachycardia
 
Peak said:
JET, AVNRT, WPW, LGL, Flutter, Fib...

It can be essentially impossible to differentiate origin with a heart rate of 220-300+

AV nodal reentry tachycardia
Click to expand...

So then it's the fact our machines aren't precise enough or the mechanical/electrical activity of the heart is just basically tripping over itself?
 
DragonClaw said:
So then it's the fact our machines aren't precise enough or the mechanical/electrical activity of the heart is just basically tripping over itself?
Click to expand...
Machines shouldnt be playing a role in it. Nobody should be treating based off a monitor interpretation.
 
DragonClaw said:
So then it's the fact our machines aren't precise enough or the mechanical/electrical activity of the heart is just basically tripping over itself?
Click to expand...

The rate is just too fast to interpret. Sometimes you can get a better idea by slowing down the speed on your 12 lead, but often you are depolarizing and repolarizing multiple areas of the heart at the same time, so it just isn’t possible to differentiate.

Sometimes you can do an adenosine trial or watch their morphology when they break out. History can play a big role. There are some rhythms that we just can’t differentiate without going to the EP/cath lab.
 
DragonClaw said:
In just cardiac rhythms ? Is it a matter of signs vs symptoms or untrustworthy monitors.
Click to expand...

This is a medic and up thing but you should always be independently reviewing your EKG. When I’m in the field I throw out the interpretation because I don’t use it in my clinical decision making.
 
GMCmedic said:
Machines shouldnt be playing a role in it. Nobody should be treating based off a monitor interpretation.
Click to expand...
I don't know why, but monitors just arent good enough to be right all the time. I couldn't tell you how many 12 leads ive seen the monitor interpret as a STEMI that wasnt, sinus arrhythmia read as Afib, artifact as flutter, or Sinus tach as SVT.

In some cases treating the monitor interpretation can be lethal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top