Table 3.

Comparison of STEMI and OMI Paradigms

First Author	OMI Interpretation of ECG	Patient Outcome
Aslanger et al36	OMI expert: blinded interpretation identify 28.2% of non-STEMI identified by as having ACO	Non-STEMI identified as ACO had higher myocardial damage, in-hospital and long-term mortality than non-STEMI without ACO
Meyers et al39	OMI expert: blinded interpretation for OMI double sensitivity compared with STEMI (86% vs 41%) and preserved specificity (94% vs 91%)	STEMI(+) and STEMI(−)OMI similar outcomes STEMI(−) OMI could be identified an average of 3 h earlier using OMI criteria
Al-Zaiti et al44	AI: 86% sensitivity and 98% specificity for OMI, superior to practicing clinicians (58% and 93%) and conventional computer (79% and 80%)	AI could reclassify one in three patients with chest pain
Herman et al45	AI: 80.6% sensitivity and 93.7% specificity for OMI, superior to STEMI criteria (32.5% sensitivity) with preserved specificity (97.7%)	AI could detect OMI 3 hours earlier

ACO = acute coronary occlusion; AI = artificial intelligence; other abbreviations as in Table 1.