Early diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction in patients without ST-segment elevation

Evaluation of cardiac parameters between survivors and nonsurvivors of COVID-19 patients

OBJECTIVE

The present study compares the cardiac parameters of the survivor and nonsurvivor patients with COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

This study was conducted in 379 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 disease. Information of 21 nonsurvivor and 358 survivor patients with COVID-19 was obtained from the hospital information management system and analyzed retrospectively. Relationship between cardiac parameters in patients categorized into the mortal and immortal groups was investigated.

RESULTS

Of the total 379 patients involved in this study, 155 (40.9%) were females and 224 (59.1%) were males. No statistically significant difference in mortality was found between females and males (p=0.249). The total median age was 70, the median age in the nonsurvivor group was 74 (35-89), and it was 69.5 (18-96) in the survivor group (p=0.249). The median values of high-sensitivity troponin (hs-Tn), creatine kinase MB form, and especially myoglobin in the survivor and nonsurvivor groups were 25/64.9 (p=0.028), 18/23 (p=0.02), and 105.5/322.4 (p<0.001), and the difference was statistically significant. Comparing mortality, while there was 1 (0.7%) nonsurvivor out of 134 patients in the service unit, there were 20 (8.2%) nonsurvivors out of 245 patients in the intensive care unit. This difference was statistically significant (p=0.003). The cutoff value of myoglobin, which may pose a risk of mortality, was found to be 191.4 µg/L, while it was 45.7 ng/l for hs-Tn and 60.1 U/L for creatine kinase MB.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced age and increased levels of high-sensitivity troponin, creatine kinase MB, and myoglobin were found to be associated with mortality.

Novel experimental model for studying the spatiotemporal electrical signature of acute myocardial ischemia: a translational platform

Myocardial ischemia is one of the most common cardiovascular pathologies and can indicate many severe and life threatening diseases. Despite these risks, current electrocardiographic detection techniques for ischemia are mediocre at best, with reported sensitivity and specificity ranging from 50%-70% and 70%-90%, respectively.

OBJECTIVE

To improve this performance, we set out to develop an experimental preparation to induce, detect, and analyze bioelectric sources of myocardial ischemia and determine how these sources reflect changes in body-surface potential measurements.

APPROACH

We designed the experimental preparation with three important characteristics: (1) enable comprehensive and simultaneous high-resolution electrical recordings within the myocardial wall, on the heart surface, and on the torso surface; (2) develop techniques to visualize these recorded electrical signals in time and space; and (3) accurately and controllably simulate ischemic stress within the heart by modulating the supply of blood, the demand for perfusion, or a combination of both.

MAIN RESULTS

To achieve these goals we designed comprehensive system that includes (1) custom electrode arrays (2) signal acquisition and multiplexing units, (3) a surgical technique to place electrical recording and myocardial ischemic control equipment, and (4) an image based modeling pipeline to acquire, process, and visualize the results. With this setup, we are uniquely able to capture simultaneously and continuously the electrical signatures of acute myocardial ischemia within the heart, on the heart surface, and on the body surface.

SIGNIFICANCE

This novel experimental preparation enables investigation of the complex and dynamic nature of acute myocardial ischemia that should lead to new, clinically translatable results.

Role of imaging for acute chest pain syndromes

Acute chest pain suggestive of ischemic cardiac origin, with a normal or nondiagnostic electrocardiogram and negative initial cardiac markers for myocardial necrosis represent a significant diagnostic dilemma for clinicians. Multiple imaging modalities play a pivotal role in early diagnosis and safe discharge of these patients. In this review, we compare the current imaging modalities available for these patients including their diagnostic accuracy, feasibility, and cost effectiveness. Acute rest myocardial perfusion imaging significantly improves the clinical outcome in these patients and reduces the overall cost when incorporated into the decision making pathway. The choice of imaging modality recommended should be based on local institutional expertise and the overall clinical presentation. The imaging modality with high diagnostic accuracy and negative predictive value will provide for precise risk stratification which is important to clinical decision making, including patients who require admission to the hospital and those who can be safely discharged.

Management strategies for patients with low-risk chest pain in the emergency department

OPINION STATEMENT

There is abundant evidence to guide the management of chest pain patients with a confirmed or reasonably suspected diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). But when it comes to the low-risk chest pain patient in the emergency department, there is limited evidence to support one approach over another. As a result, the evaluation of low-risk chest pain represents a distinct challenge for the emergency physician. Missing a diagnosis of ACS is certainly undesirable. However, the overuse of technology can result in misleading test results in populations with a low incidence of coronary disease. In this article, we dispel several myths surrounding low-risk chest pain and put forward a number of common-sense recommendations. We endorse taking a focused but thorough chest pain history; encourage the use of serial electrocardiogram, particularly for patients with ongoing or changing symptoms; comment on the interpretation of cardiac biomarkers in the era of highly sensitive troponin assays, drawing a distinction between myocardial injury and myocardial infarction; discuss the role of coronary computed tomography angiography as a test for coronary artery disease, rather than for ACS; and caution against the reflexive use of provocative testing in low-risk chest pain patients.

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.

Multiplexed mass spectrometric immunoassay in biomarker research: a novel approach to the determination of a myocardial infarct

Reported here is the development of a multiplexed mass spectrometric immunoassay (MSIA) for the detection of myocardial infarction (MI). The assay is the product of a study that systematically progresses from biomarker discovery--to identification and verification--to assay design, data analysis, and statistical challenge. During targeted population proteomics investigations, two novel biomarkers, serum amyloid A1alpha and S-sulfated transthyretin, were found to be responsive to MI. These putative markers were subsequently screened in larger cohorts of individuals to verify their responsiveness toward MI. Upon verification, a multiplexed assay was designed that was capable of simultaneously monitoring the new markers plus a previously established MI-marker (myoglobin). The multiplexed MSIA was applied to two 96-sample sets comprised of 48-MI/48-healthy and 19-MI/77-healthy, which served as training and case cohorts, respectively. Data evaluation using either preset reference levels or multivariate analysis exhibited sensitivities and specificities of >97%. These findings illustrate the importance of using systematic approaches in clinical proteomics to discover biomarkers and produce high-performance assays relevant to disease.

Chest pain unit concept: rationale and diagnostic strategies

Each year in the United States, over 8 million patients present to the emergency department(ED) with complaints of chest discomfort or other symptoms consistent with possible acute coronary syndrome (ACS). While over half of these patients are typically admitted for further diagnostic evaluation, fewer than 20% are diagnosed with ACS. With hospital beds and inpatient resources scarce, these admissions can be avoided by evaluating low- to moderate-risk patients in chest pain units. This large, undifferentiated patient population represents a potential high-risk group for emergency physicians requiring a systematic approach and specific ED resources. This evaluation is required to appropriately determine if a patient is safe to be discharged home with outpatient follow-up versus requiring admission to the hospital for monitoring and further testing.

Acute coronary syndromes in the emergency department: diagnostic characteristics, tests, and challenges

Failure to diagnose patients who have acute coronary syndromes (ACSs)-either acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or unstable angina pectoris (UAP)-who present to the emergency department (ED) remains a serious public health issue. Better understanding of the pathophysiology of coronary artery disease has allowed the adoption of a unifying hypothesis for the cause of ACSs: the conversion of a stable atherosclerotic lesion to a plaque rupture with thrombosis. Thus, physicians have come to appreciate UAP and AMI as parts of a continuum of ACSs. This article reviews the state of the art regarding the diagnosis of ACSs in the emergency setting and suggests reasons why missed diagnosis continues to occur, albeit infrequently.

Acute coronary syndromes: initial evaluation and risk stratification

Chest pain, the second most frequent presenting complaint in the emergency department (ED), often poses a challenge to the physicians dealing with these patients owing to the wide spectrum of presentation of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). A majority of the patients presenting with chest pain are usually admitted to the hospital for further evaluation and management. Despite the availability of modern-day tools for diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), about 5% of patients with AMI are missed in the ED with subsequent associated morbidity and mortality and legal consequences. Several centers have adapted critical pathways derived from American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines for the management of patients presenting with ACS. We now have some evidence suggesting adherence to the critical pathways derived from ACC/AHA guidelines will optimize the quality of patient care and probably result in better patient outcomes. This article reviews initial evaluation and the importance of risk stratification of the patients presenting with chest pain using the currently available clinical and diagnostic tools. Critical pathways derived from the ACC/AHA guidelines for various presentations of ACS are also reviewed.

Evaluation of patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes in the emergency department

Patients complaining of chest pain (CP) who visit the emergency department (ED) represent the second cause of consultation in this department, and 20-30% of hospital admissions for medical reasons. These patients form a somewhat heterogeneous group with many different aetiologies and degrees of severity. In this setting, the clinical objectives include the prompt identification of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACSs), the prompt evaluation of the immediate risk (i.e., initial risk stratification) of cardiovascular complications in order to tailor the treatment for each individual patient and to make the best use of hospital resources, and the prompt identification of patients with other potentially severe diseases. The diagnosis of ACS in patients coming to the ED for CP or any equivalent angina is one of the most difficult diagnostic challenges facing physicians in the ED. The correct diagnosis and risk stratification of these patients has clinical consequences, as well as very important legal and economic implications. The only methodology with a clear clinical impact on diagnosis, risk stratification and initial management is clinical evaluation based on data obtained by questioning the patient, carrying out a physical examination, and interpreting the results of a standard 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG). Nevertheless, its combined diagnostic efficiency for ACS is imperfect and additional strategies are emerging which include serial ECG, the detection of serum biochemical markers of myocardial necrosis, exercise testing, and radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging.

[Biological markers of myocardial necrosis]

New biological markers of myocardial injury have improved the management of patients with acute coronary syndromes. Among these markers, the most relevant are the cardiac troponins (troponin I and troponin T) because of their cardiospecificity, and myoglobin because of its combination of diagnostic sensitivity and usefulness for an early diagnosis. The serial analysis and combined use of both markers fulfill all diagnostic and prognostic requirements, and are helpful in indicating therapeutic strategies for acute coronary syndromes. However, these markers also have limitations, and their concentrations should always be interpreted in the light of the patient's clinical status.

Diagnosis of acute cardiac ischemia

A better understanding of coronary syndromes allow physicians to appreciate UAP and AMI as part of a continuum of ACI. ACI is a life-threatening condition whose identification can have major economic and therapeutic importance as far as threatening dysrhythmias and preventing or limiting myocardial infarction size. The identification of ACI continues to challenge the skill of even experienced clinicians, yet physicians continue (appropriately) to admit the overwhelming majority of patients with ACI; in the process, they admit many patients without acute ischemia [2], overestimating the likelihood of ischemia in low-risk patients because of magnified concern for this diagnosis for prognostic and therapeutic reasons. Studies of admitting practices from a decade ago have yielded useful clinical information but have shown that neither clinical symptoms nor the ECG could reliably distinguish most patients with ACI from those with other conditions. Most studies have evaluated the accuracy of various technologies for diagnosing ACI, yet only a few have evaluated the clinical impact of routine use. The prehospital 12-lead ECG has moderate sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of ACI. It has demonstrated a reduction of the mean time to thrombolysis by 33 minutes and short-term overall mortality in randomized trials. In the general ED setting, only the ACI-TIPI has demonstrated, in a large-scale multicenter clinical trial, a reduction in unnecessary hospitalizations without decreasing the rate of appropriate admission for patients with ACI. The Goldman chest pain protocol has good sensitivity for AMI but was not shown to result in any differences in hospitalization rate, length of stay, or estimated costs in the single clinical impact study performed. The protocol's applicability to patients with UAP has not been evaluated. Single measurement of biomarkers at presentation to the ED has poor sensitivity for AMI, although most biomarkers have high specificity. Serial measurements can greatly increase the sensitivity for AMI while maintaining their excellent specificity. Biomarkers cannot identify most patients with UAP. Finally, diagnostic technologies to evaluate ACI in selected populations, such as echocardiography, sestamibi perfusion imaging, and stress ECG, may have very good to excellent sensitivity; however, they have not been sufficiently studied.

Incidence of high-risk acute coronary syndromes and eligibility for glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors among patients admitted for possible myocardial ischemia

OBJECTIVE

Recent studies have demonstrated that glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitors can reduce cardiac events in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). However, little is known about how many patients are actually eligible for treatment. Our purpose was to determine how many patients admitted for possible myocardial infarction (MI) meet GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor treatment criteria.

METHODS

Patients admitted for possible MI who underwent a standard protocol that included serial sampling of total creatine kinase (CK), CK-MB, and troponin I (TnI) were retrospectively assigned to different treatment algorithms on the basis of criteria from GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor trials: an electrocardiogram (ECG) consistent with acute MI or ischemia, and myocardial marker elevations. Elevated CK-MB was considered diagnostic of MI. High-risk ACS was defined as ischemic ECG changes or troponin elevations without CK-MB elevations.

RESULTS

A total of 2179 patients were admitted for MI exclusion. MI was identified in 304 patients (14.0%) (123 ST-elevation, 49 ischemic ECG, 132 nonischemic ECG). Another 273 patients (12.5%) without CK-MB criteria for MI met high-risk ACS criteria (172 ischemic ECG, 120 TnI elevations). Ischemic ECGs or elevated myocardial markers identified 454 (21%) patients as eligible for treatment. Inclusion of patients with ST elevation increased eligibility to 26.5%. Of the 454 non-ST-elevation ACS patients, 340 (74%) were identified early by the ECG or the initial markers.

CONCLUSIONS

A large proportion of patients admitted for possible MI met criteria for treatment with GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors. The non-ST-elevation ACS group was >3 times larger than the ST-elevation MI group. These findings have important implications for treatment of patients with ACS.

Ninety-minute exclusion of acute myocardial infarction by use of quantitative point-of-care testing of myoglobin and troponin I

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic strategies with ECG and serum cardiac markers have been used to rule out acute myocardial infarction in 6 to 12 hours. The present study evaluated whether a multimarker strategy that used point-of-care measurement of myoglobin, creatine kinase (CK)-MB, and troponin I could exclude acute myocardial infarction in </=3 hours.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We prospectively enrolled consecutive patients (n=817) in the emergency department who were evaluated for possible acute myocardial infarction. In patients with nondiagnostic ECGs, we measured CK-MB, troponin I, and myoglobin with a point-of-care device at presentation and at 90 minutes, 3 hours, and 9 hours. Standard central laboratory testing of CK-MB was done at the same time intervals, and triage decisions were made by emergency physicians who were unaware of point-of-care results. Sensitivity and negative predictive value were compared for both the multimarker, point-of-care approach and the central laboratory strategy. Sensitivity and negative predictive value for point-of-care combination of myoglobin and troponin I by 90 minutes was 96.9% and 99.6%, respectively. CK-MB measurements and blood sampling at 3 hours did not improve sensitivity or negative predictive value. Median time from sampling to reporting of results was 71.0 minutes for the central laboratory versus 24.0 minutes for the point-of-care device (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Acute myocardial infarction can be excluded rapidly in the emergency department by use of point-of-care measurements of myoglobin and troponin I during the first 90 minutes after presentation.

Ninety-minute accelerated critical pathway for chest pain evaluation

Rapid, efficient, and accurate evaluation of chest pain patients in the emergency department optimizes patient care from public health, economic, and liability perspectives. To evaluate the performance of an accelerated critical pathway for patients with suspected coronary ischemia that utilizes clinical history, electrocardiographic findings, and triple cardiac marker testing (cardiac troponin I [cTnI], myoglobin, and creatine kinase-MB [CK-MB]), we performed an observational study of a chest pain critical pathway in the setting of a large Emergency Department at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in 1,285 consecutive patients with signs and symptoms of cardiac ischemia. The accelerated critical pathway for chest pain evaluation was analyzed for: (1) accuracy in triaging of patients within 90 minutes of presentation, (2) sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of cTnI, myoglobin, and CK-MB in diagnosing acute myocardial infarction (MI) within 90 minutes, and (3) impact on Coronary Care Unit (CCU) admissions. All MIs were diagnosed within 90 minutes of presentation (sensitivity 100%, specificity 94%, positive predictive value 47%, negative predictive value 100%). CCU admissions decreased by 40%. Ninety percent of patients with negative cardiac markers and a negative electrocardiogram at 90 minutes were discharged home with 1 patient returning with an MI (0.2%) within the next 30 days. Thus, a simple, inexpensive, yet aggressive critical pathway that utilizes high-risk features from clinical history, electrocardiographic changes, and rapid point-of-care testing of 3 cardiac markers allows for accurate triaging of chest pain patients within 90 minutes of presenting to the emergency department.

Evaluation of the Emergency Department chest pain patient

Patients presenting to the Emergency Department with chest pain are common and often present diagnostic difficulties. Because of the limitations of the initial evaluation, the majority of patients are admitted, although many are later found to have noncardiac causes for their symptoms. Recognition of these limitations has driven the investigation of newer evaluation techniques and protocols in an attempt to improve diagnostic sensitivity without increasing overall costs. These have included modifications of the standard ECG, and use of newer myocardial markers such as mass assays for CK-MB and troponin T and I. Use of acute rest myocardial perfusion imaging has also been shown to be a highly valuable technique for risk stratification of the intermediate- to low-risk chest pain patient.

Accuracy of imaging technologies in the diagnosis of acute cardiac ischemia in the emergency department: a meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We sought to quantitatively evaluate the evidence on the diagnostic performance of imaging technologies (including rest and stress echocardiography and technetium-99m sestamibi scanning) for the diagnosis of acute cardiac ischemia and acute myocardial infarction in the emergency department.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the English-language literature published between 1966 and December 1998. Both prospective and retrospective studies qualified for the assessment of diagnostic performance. Diagnostic performance was assessed by means of random-effect estimates of test sensitivity, specificity, and the diagnostic odds ratio and was summarized by using summary receiver-operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated in 10 studies of rest echocardiography, 2 studies of dobutamine stress echocardiography, and 6 studies of technetium-99m sestamibi scanning. However, only 3 rest echocardiography and 5 technetium-99m sestamibi studies evaluated patients strictly in the ED setting. Patient populations were often highly selected to represent low- or moderate-risk groups. When limited to ED studies, rest echocardiography showed excellent sensitivity of 93% (95% CI, 81% to 97%) and good specificity of 66% (95% CI, 43% to 83%). The results were similar when all studies were considered, including data from reports of admitted patients and patients sent to the cardiac care unit. There was insufficient literature on stress echocardiography in the ED to properly assess the technology. Technetium-99m sestamibi scanning also showed excellent sensitivity (range, 91.5% to 100%) and good specificity (range, 49.3% to 84.4%) for acute myocardial infarction; for acute cardiac ischemia, the random-effects pooled sensitivity was 89% (95% CI, 73% to 96%), and the pooled specificity was 77% (95% CI, 63% to 87%).

CONCLUSION

For selected low- and moderate-risk patient groups, echocardiography and technetium-99m sestamibi imaging appear to have very good diagnostic performance with a similar sensitivity and specificity profile. More evidence should be accumulated on their performance specifically in the ED setting.

Accuracy of biomarkers to diagnose acute cardiac ischemia in the emergency department: a meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate quantitatively the evidence on the diagnostic performance of presentation and serial biochemical markers for emergency department diagnosis of acute cardiac ischemia (ACI), including acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and unstable angina.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the English-language literature published between 1966 and December 1998. We examined the diagnostic performance of creatine kinase, creatine kinase-MB, myoglobin, and troponin I and T testing. Diagnostic performance was assessed by using estimates of test sensitivity and specificity and was summarized by summary receiver-operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

Only 4 studies were found that evaluated all patients with ACI; 73 were found that focused only on a diagnosis of AMI. To diagnose ACI, presentation biomarker tests had sensitivities of 16% to 19% and specificities of 96% to 100%; serial biomarker tests had sensitivities of 31% to 45% and specificities of 95% to 98%. Considering only the diagnosis of AMI, presentation biomarker tests had summary sensitivities of 37% to 49% and summary specificities of 87% to 97%; serial biomarker tests had summary sensitivities of 79% to 93% and summary specificities of 85% to 96%. Variation of test sensitivity was best explained by test timing. Longer symptom duration or time between serial tests yielded higher sensitivity.

CONCLUSION

The limited evidence available to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of biomarkers for ACI suggests that biomarkers have very low sensitivity to diagnose ACI. Thus, biomarkers alone will greatly underdiagnose ACI and will be inadequate to make triage decisions. For AMI diagnosis alone, multiple testing of individual biomarkers over time substantially improves sensitivity, while retaining high specificity, at the expense of additional time. Further high-quality studies are needed on the clinical effect of using biomarkers for patients with ACI in the ED and on optimal timing of serial testing and in combination with other tests.

Can myocardial infarction be rapidly identified in emergency department patients who have left bundle-branch block?

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Fibrinolytic therapy is recommended for patients who have chest pain and left bundle-branch block (LBBB). However, the presence of baseline ECG abnormalities makes early accurate identification of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) difficult. The predictive ability of clinical and ECG variables for identifying patients with LBBB and AMI has not been well studied. We sought to determine the prevalence and predictors of myocardial infarction among patients presenting to the emergency department with LBBB on the initial ECG who were evaluated for myocardial infarction.

METHODS

All patients presenting to the ED were prospectively risk stratified on the basis of clinical and historical variables. ECGs from patients with LBBB were compared retrospectively with previously published criteria for identification of AMI. The ability of a new LBBB to predict AMI was also determined.

RESULTS

Twenty-four (13%) of the 182 patients with LBBB had AMI. Clinical and historical variables were similar in patients with and without AMI. A new LBBB had a sensitivity of 42% and a specificity of 65%. The presence of concordant ST-segment elevation or depression had specificities and positive predictive values of 100%; however, sensitivities were only 8% and 17%, respectively. The best diagnostic criterion was the presence of concordant ST-segment elevation or depression on the ECG or an initially elevated creatine kinase MB (sensitivity, 63%; specificity, 99%).

CONCLUSION

ECG criteria for identifying patients with AMI and LBBB identify only a small minority of patients with AMI. Treating all patients with LBBB and chest pain with fibrinolytics would result in treatment of a significant number of patients without AMI.

Cardiac markers protocols in a chest pain observation unit

The use of cardiac markers to identify high-risk patients in the observation unit is undeniable. As the literature reviewed here reveals, the history and ECG miss a significant portion of patients with acute cardiac ischemia. It appears that acute MI and some high-risk "unstable angina" observation unit patients can be identified within 6 hours of hospital presentation using a combination of cardiac markers. Testing these patients soon after symptom onset or on arrival in the ED for myoglobin, CK-MB subforms, or CK-MB delta appears to provide the best diagnostic usefulness. For testing later in the clinical course, CK-MB troponin I, or troponin T are of clear diagnostic and prognostic value. The markers currently used are unable to identify the significant subset of patients with "non-AMI" coronary syndromes, however. These patients require further testing with appropriate noninvasive or invasive diagnostic studies.

Comparison between strategies using creatine kinase-MB(mass), myoglobin, and troponin T in the early detection or exclusion of acute myocardial infarction in patients with chest pain and a nondiagnostic electrocardiogram

Different strategies using creatine kinase-MB(mass), myoglobin, and troponin T were compared in 738 patients admitted because of chest pain and an electrocardiogram not diagnostic of acute myocardial infarction. We conclude that a combination of creatine kinase-MB and troponin T during the first 6 hours enables early detection or exclusion of acute myocardial infarction in this population.

Evaluation of the emergency department chest pain patient

Patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain are a common and perplexing problem. Because of the limitations of the initial evaluation, most patients are admitted, although many are found to have noncardiac causes of their symptoms. Recognition of these limitations has driven the investigation of newer evaluation techniques and protocols in an attempt to improve diagnostic sensitivity without increasing overall costs. These have included modifications of the standard electrocardiogram and use of newer myocardial markers of necrosis, such as mass assays for CK-MB as well as troponin T and troponin I. Use of acute rest myocardial perfusion imaging also has been shown to be a highly valuable technique for risk stratification of the intermediate- to low-risk chest pain patient.

Evaluation of chest pain suspicious for acute coronary syndrome: use of an accelerated diagnostic protocol in a chest pain evaluation unit

Management of patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain suggestive of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains a continuing challenge. A low threshold for admission has been traditional because of concern for patient welfare and the litigation potential associated with the inadvertent discharge of patients with ischemic events. Because of this approach, < 30% of patients admitted for chest pain ultimately are found to have an acute coronary syndrome. To reduce unnecessary admissions, maintain patient safety, and enhance cost-effectiveness, innovative strategies have been applied to the management of patients with chest pain. It is now recognized that a low-risk group can be identified by the clinical presentation and initial electrocardiogram. Chest-pain centers have been developed to provide further risk stratification and systematic management of these patients. We employ an accelerated diagnostic protocol based on immediate exercise treadmill testing to evaluate low-risk patients. Moderate-risk patients are assessed over a 6-hour observation period with serial electrocardiograms and evaluation of cardiac-injury markers. Patients with positive evaluations are admitted. Those with negative results undergo either exercise echocardiography or rest myocardial perfusion imaging utilizing technetium-99m sestamibi. Patients with positive functional tests are admitted. Those with negative studies are discharged with outpatient follow-up. These strategies have provided a safe and accurate means of patient disposition from the emergency department with the potential for vital cost savings.