Non-invasive assessment of low risk acute chest pain in the emergency department: A comparative meta-analysis of prospective studies

Coronary calcium score in the initial evaluation of suspected coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring as an initial diagnostic tool in outpatients and in patients presenting at the emergency department due to suspected coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

10 857 patients underwent CAC scoring and coronary CT angiography (CCTA) at Haukeland University Hospital in Norway during 2013-2020. Based on CCTA, obstructive CAD was defined as at least one coronary stenosis ≥50%. High-risk CAD included obstructive stenoses of the left main stem, the proximal left ascending artery or affecting all three major vascular territories with at least one proximal segment involved.

RESULTS

Median age was 58 years and 49.5% were women. The overall prevalence of CAC=0 was 45.0%. Among those with CAC=0, 1.8% had obstructive CAD and 0.6% had high-risk CAD on CCTA. Overall, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value (NPV) of CAC=0 for obstructive CAD were 95.3%, 53.4%, 30.0% and 98.2%, respectively. However, among patients <45 years of age, although the NPV was high at 98.9%, the sensitivity of CAC=0 for obstructive CAD was only 82.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

In symptomatic patients, CAC=0 correctly ruled out obstructive CAD and high-risk CAD in 98.2% and 99.4% of cases. This large registry-based cross-sectional study supports the incorporation of CAC testing in the early triage of patients with chest pain and as a gatekeeper to further cardiac testing. However, a full CCTA may be needed for safely ruling out obstructive CAD in the youngest patients (<45 years of age).

Reduced coronary flow velocity reserve and blunted heart rate reserve identify a higher risk group in patients with chest pain and negative emergency department evaluation

To estimate the prognostic value of stress echo (SE) with the assessment of coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR) and heart rate reserve (HRR) in patients admitted for chest pain with non-diagnostic EKG, negative troponin, and without inducible regional wall motion abnormalities (RWMA). 658 patients (age 67 ± 12 years) admitted to our Emergency Department with chest pain, non-diagnostic EKG, and negative serial troponin underwent dipyridamole (0.84 mg/kg in 6') SE with simultaneous assessment of RWMA, CFVR in the left anterior descending artery, and HRR as peak/rest heart rate. The outcome measure was all-cause mortality. Of the 658 patients initially enrolled, 20 (3%) showed RWMA during SE and were referred to ischemia-driven revascularization. In the remaining 638, CFVR was abnormal (≤ 2.0) in 148 patients (23%). HRR was abnormal (≤ 1.22 in patients in sinus rhythm, or ≤ 1.17 in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation) in 196 patients (31%). During a follow-up of 7.3 ± 4.3 years, 151 (24%) patients died. Survival at 8 years was 93% in patients with normal CFVR and HRR, 76% in patients with abnormal CFVR only, 73% in patients with abnormal HRR only, and 38% in those with abnormal CFVR and HRR (p < 0.0001). At multivariable analysis, abnormal CFVR (HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.05-2.10, p = 0.02) and abnormal HRR (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.43-2.84, p < 0.0001) were independent predictors of survival. In admitted patients with non-ischemic EKG, negative serial troponin, and without RWMA during dipyridamole SE, a reduced CFVR and blunted HRR independently identify a subset with worse survival in the long term. Upper panel: Color and pulsed-wave Doppler with the electrocardiographic lead tracing of Four different response patterns (from left to right): normal CFVR and HRR; normal CFVR, abnormal HRR; abnormal CFVR, normal HRR; abnormal CFVR and HRR. Lower panel: The annualized death rate for each of the four groups with negative SE for RWMA and stratified according to the presence of CFVR and HRR: none, one, or two abnormalities.

Non-invasive Imaging in Coronary Syndromes - Recommendations of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography, in Collaboration with the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography and Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is one of the major causes of mortality and morbidity worldwide, with a high socioeconomic impact.(1) Non-invasive imaging modalities play a fundamental role in the evaluation and management of patients with known or suspected CAD. Imaging end-points have served as surrogate markers in many observational studies and randomized clinical trials that evaluated the benefits of specific therapies for CAD.(2) A number of guidelines and recommendations have been published about coronary syndromes by cardiology societies and associations, but have not focused on the excellent opportunities with cardiac imaging. The recent European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 2019 guideline on chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) and 2020 guideline on acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting with non-ST-segment elevation (NSTE-ACS) highlight the importance of non-invasive imaging in the diagnosis, treatment, and risk assessment of the disease.(3)(4) The purpose of the current recommendations is to present the significant role of non-invasive imaging in coronary syndromes in more detail. These recommendations have been developed by the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE), in collaboration with the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, all of which have approved the final document.

Coronary Calcium to Rule Out Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Acute Chest Pain

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the ability of coronary artery calcium (CAC) as an initial diagnostic tool to rule out obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in a very large registry of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute chest pain (CP) who were at low to intermediate risk for acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

BACKGROUND

It is not yet well established whether CAC can be used to rule out obstructive CAD in the ED setting.

METHODS

We included patients from the Baptist Health South Florida Chest Pain Registry presenting to the ED with CP at low to intermediate risk for ACS (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction risk score ≤2, normal/nondiagnostic electrocardiography, and troponin levels) who underwent CAC and coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) procedures for evaluation of ACS. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of CAC testing to diagnose obstructive CAD and identify the need for coronary revascularization during hospitalization, we estimated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV), and negative predictive values (NPV).

RESULTS

Our study included 5,192 patients (mean age: 53.5 ± 10.8 years; 46% male; 62% Hispanic). Overall, 2,902 patients (56%) had CAC = 0, of which 135 (4.6%) had CAD (114 [3.9%] nonobstructive and 21 [0.7%] obstructive). Among those with CAC >0, 23% had obstructive CAD. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CAC testing to diagnose obstructive CAD were 96.2%, 62.4%, 22.4%, and 99.3%, respectively. The NPV for identifying those who needed revascularization was 99.6%. Among patients with CAC = 0, 11 patients (0.4%) underwent revascularization, and the number needed to test with CCTA to detect 1 patient who required revascularization was 264.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large population presenting to ED with CP at low to intermediate risk, CAC = 0 was common. CAC = 0 ruled out obstructive CAD and revascularization in more than 99% of the patients, and <5% with CAC = 0 had any CAD. Integrating CAC testing very early in CP evaluation may be effective in appropriate triage of patients by identifying individuals who can safely defer additional testing and more invasive procedures.

Effect of radiographer-led intervention on reassurance, treatment satisfaction, and recurring chest pain in patients with a normal coronary computed tomography angiography-a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chest pain is a common complaint in the general practitioner's (GP) office. Computed tomography (CT) is one of the main diagnostic tools available for assessing coronary artery disease (CAD), with a low probability of a false-negative result (<1%). Despite normal CT findings, many patients with non-coronary chest pain believe they suffer from CAD.

AIMS

To determine the effect of an intervention on reassurance, treatment satisfaction, and recurring chest pain in patients with non-coronary chest pain at follow-up after 1 month.

METHODS

Patients with chest pain, but with normal coronary CT angiography, i.e., no CAD, were randomized into two groups. The intervention group received extended information about the CT examination, including visualization of their individual coronary calcium score images, before the radiographer conveyed the final examination result. The control group received standard care, i.e., neither extended information nor the examination result and were encouraged to consult their referring cardiologist or GP after 1 week. Items from the Seattle Angina Questionnaire and a question regarding reassurance measured the effect of the intervention at follow-up after 1 month.

RESULTS

The study included 92 patients, 63 female and 29 male, with a follow-up response rate of 80%. Reassurance and overall treatment satisfaction were significantly higher in the intervention group (P = 0.016 and P = 0.046 respectively). The incidence of chest pain was significantly reduced in the intervention group (P = 0.042).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that the intervention group showed significantly higher reassurance, overall treatment satisfaction, and experienced significantly less chest pain at follow-up after 1 month.

CLINICAL TRIALS DATABASE ID

NCT03781661.

Artificial Intelligence to Assist in Exclusion of Coronary Atherosclerosis During CCTA Evaluation of Chest Pain in the Emergency Department: Preparing an Application for Real-world Use

Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) evaluation of chest pain patients in an emergency department (ED) is considered appropriate. While a "negative" CCTA interpretation supports direct patient discharge from an ED, labor-intensive analyses are required, with accuracy in jeopardy from distractions. We describe the development of an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm and workflow for assisting qualified interpreting physicians in CCTA screening for total absence of coronary atherosclerosis. The two-phase approach consisted of (1) phase 1-development and preliminary testing of an algorithm for vessel-centerline extraction classification in a balanced study population (n = 500 with 50% disease prevalence) derived by retrospective random case selection, and (2) phase 2-simulated clinical Trialing of developed algorithm on a per-case (entire coronary artery tree) basis in a more "real-world" study population (n = 100 with 28% disease prevalence) from an ED chest pain series. This allowed pre-deployment evaluation of the AI-based CCTA screening application which provides vessel-by-vessel graphic display of algorithm inference results integrated into a clinically capable viewer. Algorithm performance evaluation used area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC); confusion matrices reflected ground truth vs AI determinations. The vessel-based algorithm demonstrated strong performance with AUC-ROC = 0.96. In both phase 1 and phase 2, independent of disease prevalence differences, negative predictive values at the case level were very high at 95%. The rate of completion of the algorithm workflow process (96% with inference results in 55-80 s) in phase 2 depended on adequate image quality. There is potential for this AI application to assist in CCTA interpretation to help extricate atherosclerosis from chest pain presentations.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Acute Nonspecific Chest Pain-Low Probability of Coronary Artery Disease

Patients with acute nonspecific chest pain and low probability for coronary disease remain an important clinical management dilemma. We focus on evidence for imaging, in an integrated decision-making setting. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Chest Pain-Possible Acute Coronary Syndrome

Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits and inpatient evaluation, with particular concern for acute coronary syndrome as an etiology, since cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in the United States. Although history-based, electrocardiographic, and laboratory evaluations have shown promise in identifying coronary artery disease, early accurate diagnosis is paramount and there is an important role for imaging examinations to determine the presence and extent of anatomic coronary abnormality and ischemic physiology, to guide management with regard to optimal medical therapy or revascularization, and ultimately to thereby improve patient outcomes. A summary of the various methods for initial imaging evaluation of suspected acute coronary syndrome is outlined in this document. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Cardiac CT in the Emergency Department: Contrasting Evidence from Registries and Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To compare outcomes between registries and randomized controlled trials of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA)-based versus standard of care approaches to the initial evaluation of patients with acute chest pain.

RECENT FINDINGS

Randomized trials have demonstrated CCTA to be a safe and efficient tool for triage of low- to intermediate-risk patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain. Recent studies demonstrate heterogeneous result using different standard of care approaches for evaluation of hard endpoints in comparison with standard evaluation. Also, there has been continued concern for increase in subsequent testing after coronary CTA. Although CCTA improves detection of coronary artery disease, it is uncertain if it will bring improvement of long-term health outcomes at this point of time. Careful analysis of the previous results and further investigation will be required to validate evaluation of hard endpoints.

Sex differences in heart failure

Heart failure (HF) numbers continue to grow in the United States and approximately 50% of patients living with HF are women. For the provider, it is critical to understand the role that gender plays in recognition, diagnosis, and management. The purpose of this literature review is to highlight the prevalence of heart failure in women and discuss gender variations in epidemiology, symptoms, pharmacology, and treatment as well as examine the representation of women in clinical trials.

Comparison of mid- to long-term clinical outcomes between anatomical testing and usual care in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Controversies remain regarding clinical outcomes following initial strategies of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) vs usual care with functional testing in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD).

HYPOTHESIS

CCTA as initial diagnostic strategy results in better mid- to long-term outcomes than usual care in patients with suspected CAD.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials comparing clinical outcomes during ≥6 months' follow-up between initial anatomical testing by CCTA vs usual care with functional testing in patients with suspected CAD. Occurrence of all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and use of invasive coronary angiography and coronary revascularization, were compared between the 2 diagnostic strategies.

RESULTS

Twelve trials were included (20 014 patients; mean follow-up, 20.5 months). Patients undergoing CCTA as initial noninvasive testing had lower risk of nonfatal MI compared with those treated with usual care (risk ratio [RR]: 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52-0.94, P = 0.02). There was a tendency for reduced MACE following initial CCTA strategy, but not for risk of all-cause mortality. Compared with functional testing, the CCTA strategy increased use of invasive coronary angiography (RR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.12-2.09, P = 0.007) and coronary revascularization (RR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.11-2.00, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Anatomical testing with CCTA as the initial noninvasive diagnostic modality in patients with suspected CAD resulted in lower risk of nonfatal MI than usual care with functional testing, at the expense of more frequent use of invasive procedures.

Chest pain: coronary CT in the ER

Cardiac CT has developed into a robust clinical tool during the past 15 years. Of the fields in which the potential of cardiac CT has raised more interest is chest pain in acute settings. In fact, the possibility to exclude with high reliability obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients at low-to-intermediate risk is of great interest both from the clinical standpoint and from the management standpoint. Several other modalities, with or without imaging, have been used during the past decades in the settings of new onset chest pain or in acute chest pain for both diagnostic and prognostic assessment of CAD. Each one has advantages and disadvantages. Most imaging modalities also focus on inducible ischaemia to guide referral to invasive coronary angiography. The advent of cardiac CT has introduced a new practice diagnostic paradigm, being the most accurate non-invasive method for identification and exclusion of CAD. Furthermore, the detection of subclinical CAD and plaque imaging offer the opportunity to improve risk stratification. Moreover, recent advances of the latest generation CT scanners allow combining both anatomical and functional imaging by stress myocardial perfusion. The role of cardiac CT in acute settings is already important and will become progressively more important in the coming years.

Cardiac CT angiography for evaluation of acute chest pain

Chest pain is the second most common emergency department (ED) presentation in the United States. Cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) now plays an important role in the evaluation of patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome in the ED setting. In this article, we review the available techniques focused on the use of CCTA to evaluate patients fosr coronary atherosclerosis for timely triage of acute chest pain.