Changes in the numeric descriptive scale for pain after sublingual nitroglycerin do not predict cardiac etiology of chest pain

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. Structure: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

High-Risk Chief Complaints I: Chest Pain-The Big Three (an Update)

Nontraumatic chest pain is a frequent concern of emergency department patients, with causes that range from benign to immediately life threatening. Identifying those patients who require immediate/urgent intervention remains challenging and is a high-risk area for emergency medicine physicians where incorrect or delayed diagnosis may lead to significant morbidity and mortality. This article focuses on the 3 most prevalent diagnoses associated with adverse outcomes in patients presenting with nontraumatic chest pain, acute coronary syndrome, thoracic aortic dissection, and pulmonary embolism. Important aspects of clinical evaluation, diagnostic testing, treatment, and disposition and other less common causes of lethal chest pain are also discussed.

ANMCO-SIMEU Consensus Document: in-hospital management of patients presenting with chest pain

Chest pain is a common general practice presentation that requires careful diagnostic assessment because of its diverse and potentially serious causes. However, the evaluation of acute chest pain remains challenging, despite many new insights over the past two decades. The percentage of patients presenting to the emergency departments because of acute chest pain appears to be increasing. Nowadays, there are two essential chest pain-related issues: (i) the missed diagnoses of acute coronary syndromes with a poor short-term prognosis; and (ii) the increasing percentage of hospitalizations of low-risk cases. It is well known that hospitalization of a low-risk chest pain patient can lead to unnecessary tests and procedures, with an increasing trend of complications and burden of costs. Therefore, the significantly reduced financial resources of healthcare systems induce physicians and administrators to improve the efficiency of care protocols for patients with acute chest pain. Despite the efforts of the Scientific Societies in producing statements on this topic, in Italy there is still a significant difference between emergency physicians and cardiologists in managing patients with chest pain. For this reason, the aim of the present consensus document is double: first, to review the evidence-based efficacy and utility of various diagnostic tools, and, second, to delineate the critical pathways (describing key steps) that need to be implemented in order to standardize the management of chest pain patients, making a correct diagnosis and treatment as uniform as possible across the entire country.

State-of-the-Art Evaluation of Emergency Department Patients Presenting With Potential Acute Coronary Syndromes

It is well established that clinicians cannot use clinical judgment alone to determine whether an individual patient who presents to the emergency department has an acute coronary syndrome. The history and physical examination do not distinguish sufficiently between the many conditions that can cause acute chest pain syndromes. Cardiac risk factors do not have sufficient discriminatory ability in symptomatic patients presenting to the emergency department. Most patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction do not present with electrocardiographic evidence of active ischemia. The improvement in cardiac troponin assays, especially in conjunction with well-validated clinical decision algorithms, now enables the clinician to rapidly exclude myocardial infarction. In patients in whom unstable angina remains a concern or there is a desire to evaluate for underlying coronary artery disease, coronary computed tomography angiography can be used in the emergency department. Once a process that took ≥24 hours, computed tomography angiography now can rapidly exclude myocardial infarction and coronary artery disease in patients in the emergency department.

Chest Pain in Emergency Department Patients: If the Pain is Relieved by Nitroglycerin, is it More Likely to be Cardiac Chest Pain?

Introduction:

It is often believed that chest pain relieved by nitroglycerin is indicative of coronary artery disease origin.

Objective:

To determine if relief of chest pain with nitroglycerin can be used as a diagnostic test to help differentiate cardiac chest pain and non-cardiac chest pain.

Design:

Prospective observational cohort study with a 4-week follow-up of patients enrolled.

Setting:

Academic tertiary care hospital, with 60 000 visits/year.

Inclusion criteria:

Adult patients presenting to the emergency department with active chest pain who received nitroglycerin and were admitted for chest pain.

Exclusion criteria:

Patients with acute myocardial infarction diagnosed after obtaining an ECG, patients whose chest pain could not be quantified, those for whom no cardiac work-up was done, or those who received emergent cardiac catheterization.

Results:

270 patients were enrolled. Nitroglycerin relieved chest pain in 66% of the subjects. The diagnostic sensitivity of nitroglycerin to determine cardiac chest pain was 72% (64%–80%), and the specificity was 37% (34%–41%). The positive likelihood ratio for having coronary artery disease if nitroglycerin relieved chest pain was 1.1 (0.96–1.34). Telephone follow-up at 4 weeks was performed, with a 95% follow-up rate.

Conclusions:

Relief of chest pain with nitroglycerin is not a reliable diagnostic test and does not distinguish between cardiac and non-cardiac chest pain.

Recommendations for the evaluation and management of observation services: a consensus white paper: the Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care

Observation Services (OS) was founded by emergency physicians in an attempt to manage "boarding" issues faced by emergency departments throughout the United States. As a result, OS have proven to be an effective strategy in reducing costs and decreasing lengths of stay while improving patient outcomes. When OS are appropriately leveraged for maximum efficiency, patients presenting to emergency departments with common disease processes can be effectively treated in a timely manner. A well-structured observation program will help hospitals reduce the number of inappropriate, costly inpatient admissions while avoiding the potential of inappropriate discharges. Observation medicine is a complicated multidimensional issue that has generated much confusion. This service is designed to provide the best possible patient care in a value-based purchasing environment where quality, cost, and patient satisfaction must continually be addressed. Observation medicine is a service not a status. Therefore, patients are admitted to the service as outpatients no matter whether they are placed in a virtual or dedicated observation unit. The key to a successful observation program is to determine how to maximize efficiencies. This white paper provides the reader with the foundational guidance for observational services. It defines how to set up an observational service program, which diagnoses are most appropriate for admission, and what the future holds. The goal is to help care providers from any hospital deliver the most appropriate level of treatment, to the most appropriate patient, in the most appropriate location while controlling costs.

Gender differences on chest pain perception associated with acute myocardial infarction in Chinese patients: a questionnaire survey

AIMS

To investigate gender differences in chest pain perception among Chinese patients with acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND

Thrombolytic therapy is beneficial to outcomes of acute myocardial infarction if administered within 12 hours from the onset of chest pain. However, cardiac symptom interpretation may impact time of presentation to hospital. Differences in cardiac symptom reports by gender partly explain misdiagnoses and delays in treatment, particularly among women. Whether, such trends apply to Chinese patients with myocardial infarction is unknown.

DESIGN

A descriptive prospective study.

METHODS

Using questionnaires, data on demographic variables, the number of patients reporting chest pain and other chest sensations at the onset of acute myocardial infarction and chest pain intensity, description, location and radiation across the chest were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 128 participants equally divided by gender were recruited. Chest pain was more prevalent among men than women (84.37% vs. 67.19%, p < 0.05). Although no statistical significance was found, Chinese men had higher mean chest pain intensity scores (7.54 SD 2.35 vs. 7.51 SD 2.25) and reported less atypical chest pain (0.00% vs. 9.3%) compared with women. Men had more upper right sided chest pain (40.74% vs. 20.93%, p = 0.038) whereas women experienced increased neck pain and pain to the upper central chest, middle central chest, upper central back, middle central back and middle right back regions.

CONCLUSIONS

Discreet gender differences in chest pain perceptions exist between Chinese men and women, with the latter group, who may be considered as a high-risk group for missed and delayed diagnosis from myocardial infarction, reporting more atypical presentations.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Irrespective of culture, women with myocardial infarction tend to present with atypical chest pain symptoms and therefore they should be aggressively investigated.

Testing of low-risk patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association

The management of low-risk patients presenting to emergency departments is a common and challenging clinical problem entailing 8 million emergency department visits annually. Although a majority of these patients do not have a life-threatening condition, the clinician must distinguish between those who require urgent treatment of a serious problem and those with more benign entities who do not require admission. Inadvertent discharge of patients with acute coronary syndrome from the emergency department is associated with increased mortality and liability, whereas inappropriate admission of patients without serious disease is neither indicated nor cost-effective. Clinical judgment and basic clinical tools (history, physical examination, and electrocardiogram) remain primary in meeting this challenge and affording early identification of low-risk patients with chest pain. Additionally, established and newer diagnostic methods have extended clinicians' diagnostic capacity in this setting. Low-risk patients presenting with chest pain are increasingly managed in chest pain units in which accelerated diagnostic protocols are performed, comprising serial electrocardiograms and cardiac injury markers to exclude acute coronary syndrome. Patients with negative findings usually complete the accelerated diagnostic protocol with a confirmatory test to exclude ischemia. This is typically an exercise treadmill test or a cardiac imaging study if the exercise treadmill test is not applicable. Rest myocardial perfusion imaging has assumed an important role in this setting. Computed tomography coronary angiography has also shown promise in this setting. A negative accelerated diagnostic protocol evaluation allows discharge, whereas patients with positive findings are admitted. This approach has been found to be safe, accurate, and cost-effective in low-risk patients presenting with chest pain.

An algorithm for the diagnosis and management of chest pain in primary care

This article focuses on the key clinical and investigatory features that help differentiate the multiple causes of chest pain in adults in assessment of patients with undifferentiated chest pain in primary care using history, physical examination, and basic initial investigations. The initial treatment of many of the causes is discussed. Some treatments not only relieve symptoms but also provide further diagnostic information based on the response to treatment. Guidance for referral for specialist assessment and further investigations is provided, but the diagnostic usefulness of these measures is not discussed.

Emergency department and office-based evaluation of patients with chest pain

The management of patients with chest pain is a common and challenging clinical problem. Although most of these patients do not have a life-threatening condition, the clinician must distinguish between those who require urgent management of a serious problem such as acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and those with more benign entities who do not require admission. Although clinical judgment continues to be paramount in meeting this challenge, new diagnostic modalities have been developed to assist in risk stratification. These include markers of cardiac injury, risk scores, early stress testing, and noninvasive imaging of the heart. The basic clinical tools of history, physical examination, and electrocardiography are currently widely acknowledged to allow early identification of low-risk patients who have less than 5% probability of ACS. These patients are usually initially managed in the emergency department and transitioned to further outpatient evaluation or chest pain units. Multiple imaging strategies have been investigated to accelerate diagnosis and to provide further risk stratification of patients with no initial evidence of ACS. These include rest myocardial perfusion imaging, rest echocardiography, computed tomographic coronary angiography, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. All have very high negative predictive values for excluding ACS and have been successful in reducing unnecessary admissions for patients at low to intermediate risk of ACS. As patients with acute chest pain transition from the evaluation in the emergency department to other outpatient settings, it is important that all clinicians involved in the care of these patients understand the tools used for assessment and risk stratification.

High-risk chief complaints I: chest pain--the big three

Chest pain is one of the most frequently seen chief complaints in patients presenting to emergency departments, and is considered to be a "high-risk" chief complaint. The differential diagnosis for chest pain is broad, and potential causes range from the benign to the immediately life-threatening. Although many (if not most) emergency department patients with chest pain do not have an immediately life-threatening condition, correct diagnoses can be difficult to make, incorrect diagnoses may lead to catastrophic therapies, and failure to make a timely diagnosis may contribute to significant morbidity and mortality. Several atraumatic "high-risk" causes of chest pain are discussed in this article, including myocardial infarction and ischemia, thoracic aortic dissection, and pulmonary embolism. Also included are brief discussions of tension pneumothorax, esophageal perforation, and cardiac tamponade.