Guidelines for reasonable and appropriate care in the emergency department (GRACE): Recurrent, low-risk chest pain in the emergency department

Balancing the Legal Risk to the Clinician with the Medical Interests of the Patient

The balance between risk of missing serious disease and potential harms from over testing involves knowledge of the literature, familiarity of clinical guidelines, incorporation of clinical decision tools where appropriate, use of metacognition to be aware of cognitive decisions to respond and use of shared decision-making in the context of a patient's presentation and with the guidance of the clinician.

The HET (history, electrocardiogram, and troponin) score has low efficacy and negative predictive value in a multisite U.S. cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The History, Electrocardiogram, and Troponin (HET) score is a simplified alternative to the HEART score for risk stratifying emergency department (ED) patients with chest pain. This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of the HET score for 30-day cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI).

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of the STOP-CP multisite cohort study. Risk score components were determined prospectively by the treating provider. Patients were classified into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk strata based on HEART and HET scores. Negative predictive value (NPV) was calculated for the primary safety outcome of cardiac death or MI at 30 days. Consistent with prior studies, the commonly accepted threshold of NPV ≥ 99 % was used to define safety. Efficacy was the proportion of patients classified as low risk. NPV and efficacy were compared between HET and HEART scores using generalized score statistic and McNemar's test, respectively.

RESULTS

Among 1460 patients, 46.3 % (676/1460) were women and the mean age was 57.6 ± 12.8 years. Cardiac death or MI at 30 days occurred in 12.7 % (186/1460). Among patients with a low-risk HET score, 1.4 % (4/286) experienced 30-day cardiac death or MI, while 2.2 % (12/534) of patients with a low-risk HEART score had 30-day cardiac death or MI. This yielded a NPV for 30-day of 98.6 % (95 % CI 96.5-99.6 %) for the HET score vs 97.8 % (95 % CI 96.1-98.8 %) for the HEART score (p = 0.29).Efficacy of the HET score was 19.6 % (286/1460, 95 % CI 17.6-21.6 %) vs 36.6 % (534/1460, 95 % CI 34.1-39.1 %) for the HEART score (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In a multisite US cohort study, neither the HET score nor the HEART score achieved a safe NPV. The HET score had significantly lower efficacy than the HEART score.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T to Optimize Chest Pain Risk Stratification (STOP-CP; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02984436; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02984436).

Optimizing Use of High-Sensitivity Troponin for Risk-Stratification of Acute Pulmonary Embolism

BACKGROUND

 High-sensitivity troponin T (HS-TnT) may improve risk-stratification in hemodynamically stable acute pulmonary embolism (PE), but an optimal strategy for combining this biomarker with clinical risk-stratification tools has not been determined.

STUDY HYPOTHESIS

 We hypothesized that different HS-TnT cutoff values may be optimal for identifying (1) low-risk patients who may be eligible for outpatient management and (2) patients at increased risk of clinical deterioration who might benefit from advanced PE therapies.

METHODS

 Retrospective analysis of hemodynamically stable patients in the University of Michigan acute ED-PE registry with available HS-TnT values. Primary and secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality and need for intensive care unit-level care. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to determine optimal HS-TnT cutoffs in the entire cohort, and for those at higher risk based on the simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) or imaging findings.

RESULTS

 The optimal HS-TnT cutoff in the full cohort, 12 pg/mL, was significantly associated with 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 3.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.48-10.50) and remained a significant predictor after adjusting for the simplified PESI (sPESI) score and serum creatinine (adjusted OR: 3.05, 95% CI: 1.11-8.38). A HS-TnT cutoff of 87 pg/mL was associated with 30-day mortality (OR: 5.01, 95% CI: 2.08-12.06) in patients with sPESI ≥1 or right ventricular dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

 In this retrospective, single-center study of acute PE patients, we identified distinct optimal HS-TnT values for different clinical uses-a lower cutoff, which identified low-risk patients even in the absence of other risk-stratification methods, and a higher cutoff, which was strongly associated with adverse outcomes in patients at increased risk.

Emergency Department Referral of Patients With Chest Pain for Noninvasive Cardiac Testing and 2-Year Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Noninvasive cardiac testing (NICT) has been associated with decreased long-term risks of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) among emergency department patients at high coronary risk. It is unclear whether this association extends to patients without evidence of myocardial injury on initial ECG and cardiac troponin testing.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients presenting with chest pain between 2013 and 2019 to 21 emergency departments within an integrated health care system in Northern California, excluding patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction or myocardial injury by serum troponin testing. To account for confounding by indication, we grouped patient encounters by the NICT referral rate of the initially assigned emergency physician relative to local peers within discrete time periods. The primary outcome was MACE within 2 years. Secondary outcomes were coronary revascularization and MACE, inclusive of all-cause mortality. Associations between the NICT referral group (low, intermediate, or high) and outcomes were assessed using risk-adjusted proportional hazards methods with censoring for competing events.

RESULTS

Among 144 577 eligible patient encounters, the median age was 58 years (interquartile range, 48-68) and 57% were female. Thirty-day NICT referral was 13.0%, 19.9%, and 27.8% in low, intermediate, and high NICT referral groups, respectively, with a good balance of baseline covariates between groups. Compared with the low NICT referral group, there was no significant decrease in the adjusted hazard ratio of MACE within the intermediate (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.02-1.14]) or high (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.99-1.11]) NICT referral groups. Results were similar for MACE, inclusive of all-cause mortality, and coronary revascularization, as well as subgroup analyses stratified by estimated risk (history, electrocardiogram, age, risk factors, troponin [HEART] score: percent classified as low risk, 48.2%; moderate risk, 49.2%; and high risk, 2.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Increases in NICT referrals were not associated with changes in the hazard of MACE within 2 years following emergency department visits for chest pain without evidence of acute myocardial injury. These findings further highlight the need for evidence-based guidance regarding the appropriate use of NICT in this population.

Performance of the 0/2-hour high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T diagnostic protocol in a multisite United States cohort

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic performance of the high-sensitivity troponin T (hs-cTnT) 0/2-h algorithm is unclear among U.S. emergency department (ED) patients with acute chest pain.

METHODS

A preplanned subgroup analysis of the STOP-CP cohort study was conducted. Participants with 0- and 2-h hs-cTnT measures prospectively enrolled at eight U.S. EDs from January 2017 to September 2018 were stratified into rule-out, observation, and rule-in zones using the hs-cTnT 0/2-h algorithm alone and combined with the history, electrocardiogram, age, and risk factor (HEAR) score. The primary outcome was adjudicated 30-day cardiac death or myocardial infarction (CDMI). The sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) of the 0/2-h rule-out zone and specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of the rule-in zone for 30-day CDMI were calculated.

RESULTS

Of the 1307 patients accrued, 53.6% (700/1307) were male and 58.6% (762/1307) were White, with a mean ± SD age of 57.5 ± 12.7 years. At 30 days, CDMI occurred in 12.9% (168/1307) of participants. The 0/2-h algorithm ruled out 61.4% (802/1307) of patients. Among rule-out patients, 1.9% (15/802) experienced 30-day CDMI, resulting in a sensitivity of 91.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 85.7%-94.9%) and NPV of 98.1% (95% CI 96.9%-98.9%). The 0/2-h algorithm ruled in 12.4% (162/1307) patients of whom 61.7% (100/162) experienced 30-day CDMI. The rule-in zone specificity was 94.6% (95% CI 93.1%-95.8%) and PPV was 61.7% (95% CI 53.8%-69.2%) for 30-day CDMI. The 0/2-h algorithm combined with HEAR score ruled out 30.7% (401/1307) of patients with a sensitivity and NPV for 30-day CDMI of 98.2% (95% CI 94.9%-99.6%) and 99.3% (95% CI 97.8%-99.8%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The hs-cTnT 0/2-h algorithm ruled out most patients. With NPV of <99% for 30-day CDMI, the hs-cTnT 0/2-h algorithm, many emergency physicians may not consider it safe to use for U.S. ED patients. When combined with a low-risk HEAR score, NPV was >99% for 30-day CDMI at the cost of reduced efficacy.

Introduction of a high sensitivity troponin reduces ED length of stay

BACKGROUND

High sensitivity cardiac troponins (hs-cTn) allow earlier identification and exclusion of acute myocardial infarction. We determined if transitioning from contemporary to high sensitivity troponin T (hs-cTnT) would reduce ED length of stay in chest pain (CP) patients.

METHODS

We conducted a pragmatic, prospective, before and after study of implementing a hs-cTnT by reviewing the electronic health records in all adult ED patients presenting to a large, suburban academic medical center during the 3 months before and after transitioning from a 4th generation troponin to a 5th generation hs-cTnT (Elecsys® Troponin T-high sensitive, Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN).

RESULTS

There were 1431 and 1437 CP patients before and after the intervention. Mean (SD) age was 51.5 (18) yrs. and 54.3% were female. The median (IQR) ED LOS for chest pain patients directly discharged to home was 6.2 (4.7-8.4) and 5.3 (4.0-7.2) hours before and after introducing hs-cTn respectively; difference 47 min (95%CI, 35-59); P < 0.001. The median (IQR) ED LOS for chest pain patients admitted to the hospital was 9.5 (6.6-13.8) and 8.1 (5.7-11.2) hours before and after introducing hs-cTn respectively; difference 77 min (95%CI, 35-121); P < 0.001. Overall admission rates (22 vs 21% both before and after) did not change during the study. The rates of computed tomography coronary angiography before and after the intervention were 21 and 20.4% respectively. The rates of invasive coronary angiography before and after the intervention were 5.8 and 5.6% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Transitioning to a hs-cTnT is associated with a clinically relevant and statistically significant reduction in ED LOS for both discharged and admitted patients with and without CP with no increase in admission or coronary angiography rates.

Early emergency department discharge for intermediate heart score patients presenting for chest pain

Study Objective

The use of the HEART score to risk stratify patients for short-term major adverse cardiac events in the emergency department (ED) setting is well established. Although discharge to home for low-risk HEART score patients is widely accepted as safe practice, there are limited outcomes data on moderate-risk HEART score patients discharged to home. We investigated the safety of discharging moderate-risk HEART score patients to home from the ED with established early cardiology follow-up.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of patients presenting to the ED with chest pain from April 2020 through December 2020. Patients were evaluated in the ED and underwent serial conventional troponin testing and electrocardiogram (ECG). Clinicians calculated a HEART score and employed shared decision-making with moderate-risk patients (score 4-6), offering hospital admission versus discharge home with a formalized process for rapid cardiology follow-up (within 2 business days). We assessed the frequency of acute myocardial infarction or death at 30 days and before cardiology follow-up.

Results

During our study period, 2939 patient encounters were screened for chest pain. Of these, 333 of 547 eligible moderate-risk HEART score patients were referred for rapid follow-up. The median time to follow-up appointment was 2.9 business days (interquartile range 1.3, 6.5), and 264 (79%) of patients kept their follow-up appointment. One patient (0.3%) suffered death within 30 days, before cardiology follow-up. There were no myocardial infarctions.

Conclusions

These results suggest that moderate-risk HEART score patients may be considered for discharge from the ED with rapid cardiology follow-up. Formalizing processes to facilitate these early evaluations may represent a viable alternative to hospital admission, without diminishing patient outcomes.

Guidelines for reasonable and appropriate care in the emergency department 3 (GRACE-3): Acute dizziness and vertigo in the emergency department

This third Guideline for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department (GRACE-3) from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine is on the topic adult patients with acute dizziness and vertigo in the emergency department (ED). A multidisciplinary guideline panel applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations regarding five questions for adult ED patients with acute dizziness of less than 2 weeks' duration. The intended population is adults presenting to the ED with acute dizziness or vertigo. The panel derived 15 evidence-based recommendations based on the timing and triggers of the dizziness but recognizes that alternative diagnostic approaches exist, such as the STANDING protocol and nystagmus examination in combination with gait unsteadiness or the presence of vascular risk factors. As an overarching recommendation, (1) emergency clinicians should receive training in bedside physical examination techniques for patients with the acute vestibular syndrome (AVS; HINTS) and the diagnostic and therapeutic maneuvers for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV; Dix-Hallpike test and Epley maneuver). To help distinguish central from peripheral causes in patients with the AVS, we recommend: (2) use HINTS (for clinicians trained in its use) in patients with nystagmus, (3) use finger rub to further aid in excluding stroke in patients with nystagmus, (4) use severity of gait unsteadiness in patients without nystagmus, (5) do not use brain computed tomography (CT), (6) do not use routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a first-line test if a clinician trained in HINTS is available, and (7) use MRI as a confirmatory test in patients with central or equivocal HINTS examinations. In patients with the spontaneous episodic vestibular syndrome: (8) search for symptoms or signs of cerebral ischemia, (9) do not use CT, and (10) use CT angiography or MRI angiography if there is concern for transient ischemic attack. In patients with the triggered (positional) episodic vestibular syndrome, (11) use the Dix-Hallpike test to diagnose posterior canal BPPV (pc-BPPV), (12) do not use CT, and (13) do not use MRI routinely, unless atypical clinical features are present. In patients diagnosed with vestibular neuritis, (14) consider short-term steroids as a treatment option. In patients diagnosed with pc-BPPV, (15) treat with the Epley maneuver. It is clear that as of 2023, when applied in routine practice by emergency clinicians without special training, HINTS testing is inaccurate, partly due to use in the wrong patients and partly due to issues with its interpretation. Most emergency physicians have not received training in use of HINTS. As such, it is not standard of care, either in the legal sense of that term ("what the average physician would do in similar circumstances") or in the common parlance sense ("the standard action typically used by physicians in routine practice").

Comparing the effectiveness of existing anxiety treatment options among patients evaluated for chest pain and anxiety in the emergency department setting: Study protocol for the PACER pragmatic randomized comparative effectiveness trial

BACKGROUND

Anxiety disorders are a common underlying cause of symptoms among low-risk chest pain patients evaluated in the emergency department setting. However, anxiety is often undiagnosed and undertreated in any setting, and causes considerable functional impairment to work, family, and social life.

OBJECTIVES

The Patient-Centered Treatment of Anxiety after Low-Risk Chest Pain in the Emergency Room (PACER) study is a pragmatic randomized trial to test the comparative effectiveness of existing anxiety treatments of graduated intensities and determine what options work best for patient subgroups based on anxiety severity and other comorbidities.

METHODS

The PACER trial will enroll 375 emergency department patients with low-risk chest pain and anxiety (GAD-7 score ≥ 8) and randomize them to either: 1) referral to primary care with enhanced care coordination, 2) online self-administered cognitive behavioral therapy with guided peer support, or 3) therapist-administered cognitive behavior therapy. Outcomes include anxiety symptoms (primary) as well as physical symptom burden, depression symptoms, functional impairment, ED recidivism, and occurrence of major adverse cardiac events. Statistical analyses will be conducted primarily using linear mixed models to perform a repeated measures analysis of patient-reported outcomes, assessed at 3, 6, 9, and 12-month follow-ups.

DISCUSSION

PACER is an innovative and pragmatic clinical trial that will compare the effectiveness of several evidence-based telecare-delivered treatments for anxiety. Results have the potential to inform clinical guidelines for evaluation and management of low-risk chest pain patients and promote adoption of findings in ED departments across the country.

High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin and the 2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guidelines for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Acute Chest Pain

The 2021 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/American Society of Echocardiography/American College of Chest Physicians/Society for Academic Emergency Medicine/Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography/Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance guidelines for the evaluation and diagnosis of acute chest pain make important recommendations that include the recognition of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) as the preferred biomarker, endorsement of 99th percentile upper reference limits to define myocardial injury, and the use of clinical decision pathways, as well as acknowledgment of the uniqueness of women and other patient subsets. Details on how to integrate hs-cTn into clinical practice are less extensively addressed. Clinicians should be aware of some of the analytical aspects related to hs-cTn assays regarding the limit of detection and the limit of quantitation and how they are used clinically, especially for the single sample strategy to rule out acute myocardial infarction. Likewise, it is important for clinicians to understand issues related to the derivation of the 99th percentile upper reference limit; the value of sex-specific 99th percentile upper reference limits; how to use changing concentrations (deltas) to facilitate diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome, including the differentiation of acute from chronic myocardial injury; and how to best integrate the use of hs-cTn with clinical decision pathways. With the use of hs-cTn, conditions such as type 2 myocardial infarction become more common, whereas others such as unstable angina become less frequent but still occur. Sections relating to these issues are included.

Educator's blueprint: A how-to guide for creating a high-quality infographic

Infographics are a valuable tool for increasing knowledge translation and dissemination. They can be used to simplify complex topics and supplement the written text of a study. This Educator's Blueprint paper will provide 10 strategies for creating high-quality infographics. These strategies include selecting appropriate content, defining the target audience, considering the format, selecting the software, using consistent font and color schemes, increasing image utilization, ensuring a consistent flow of ideas, avoiding copyright and HIPAA violations, getting feedback from others, and utilizing effective dissemination strategies. These strategies will help guide educators to increase their ability to create more effective infographics.

Major adverse cardiac event rates in moderate-risk patients: Does prior coronary disease matter?

BACKGROUND

Despite negative troponins and nonischemic electrocardiograms (ECGs), patients at moderate risk for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are frequently admitted. The objective of this study was to describe the major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate in moderate-risk patients and how it differs based on history of coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

A secondary analysis of the HEART Pathway implementation study was conducted. This prospective interrupted time-series study accrued adults with possible ACS from three sites (November 2013-January 2016). This analysis excluded low-risk patients determined by emergency providers' HEART Pathway assessments. Non-low-risk patients were further classified as high risk, based on elevated troponin measures or ischemic ECG findings or as moderate risk, based on HEAR score ≥ 4, negative troponin measures, and a nonischemic ECG. Moderate-risk patients were then stratified by the presence or absence of prior CAD (MI, revascularization, or ≥70% coronary stenosis). MACE (death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization) at 30 days was determined from health records, insurance claims, and death index data. MACE rates were compared among groups using a chi-square test and likelihood ratios (LRs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Among 4,550 patients with HEART Pathway assessments, 24.8% (1,130/4,550) were high risk and 37.7% (1715/4550) were moderate risk. MACE at 30 days occurred in 3.1% (53/1,715; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.3% to 4.0%) of moderate-risk patients. Among moderate-risk patients, MACE occurred in 7.1% (36/508, 95% CI = 5.1% to 9.8%) of patients with known CAD versus 1.4% (17/1,207, 95% CI = 0.9% to 2.3%) in patients without known prior CAD (p < 0.0001). The negative LR for 30-day MACE among moderate-risk patients without prior CAD was 0.08 (95% CI = 0.05 to 0.12).

CONCLUSION

MACE rates at 30 days were low among moderate-risk patients but were significantly higher among those with prior CAD.

Major adverse cardiac events after emergency department evaluation of chest pain patients with advanced testing: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to describe the risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 1, 6, and 12 months after a negative coronary computed tomography angiogram (cCTA), electrocardiogram (ECG) stress test, stress echocardiography, and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) in low- to intermediate-risk patients.

METHODS

Initially, 952 articles were identified for screening, 81 met criteria for full-text review, and once risk of bias was assessed, 33 articles were included in this meta-analysis. We utilized a random-effects model to assess pooled MACE event proportion for patients undergoing evaluation of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) when risk stratified to a low- to intermediate-risk category after undergoing standard testing. Heterogeneity analysis was performed using Cochrane's Q-test and I² statistic.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies evaluated follow-up at 1 month with cCTA having a 0.09% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.03% to 0.26%) pooled MACE compared to 0.23% (95% CI = 0.01% to 5.8%) of the exercise stress testing (p = 1). MPS and cCTA had an overall event rate of 0.15% (95% CI = 0.06% to 0.41%) at 6 months (I²  = 0%). At 12 months, a subgroup analysis found a pooled cCTA MACE of 0.16% (95% CI = 0.04% to 0.65%) compared to 1.68% (95% CI = 0.01% to 2.6%) for stress echocardiography with low within-group heterogeneity (I²  = 0%). Subgroup analysis of cCTA with no disease versus nonobstructive disease (<50% stenosis) did not find statistical difference in the MACE at both 1 month (0.17% [95% CI = 0.04% to 0.67%] vs. 0.06% [95% CI = 0.01% to 0.34%]) and 12 months (0.44% [95% CI = 0.09% to 2.2% vs. 0.54% [95% CI = 0.19% to 1.5%]).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients presenting with chest pain who have a coronary CTA showing < 50% stenosis, negative ECG stress test, stress echocardiography, or stress myocardial perfusion scan in the past 12 months can be discharged without any further risk stratification if their ECG and troponin are reassuring given low MACE.

Diagnostic testing in nontrauma patients presenting to the emergency department with recurrent seizures: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of consensus regarding the role of investigations among patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with recurrent seizures. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the frequency and utility of commonly requested investigations for nontrauma patients presenting to the ED with recurrent seizures.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched (March 2021) for articles on this topic using search terms related to recurrent seizures, investigations, and the ED. The inclusion criteria required that articles include adult nontrauma patients presenting to the ED. Studies exclusively investigating first-episode seizures, trauma patients, and status epilepticus were excluded. Eligible studies were assessed for bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results of studies were presented using proportions.

RESULTS

There were six cohort studies included that contributed data from 36,595 patients. All six studies assessed at least one of our primary outcomes for computed tomography (CT) brain scans. The proportion of patients who underwent a head CT ranged from 13% to 42%. The rates of abnormal head CT findings ranged from 8% to 21%. One study reported on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and found it used infrequently in 0.79% of cases. The proportion and yield of nonneuroimaging investigations were not well evaluated in this patient population. Only one study reported on the utility of sodium levels or blood glucose results for this population and reported abnormalities in sodium levels for 19% of patients and abnormalities in glucose levels in 50% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population, CT brain scans appeared to be performed uncommonly but with moderate rates of abnormal findings. In the absence of prolonged alteration of consciousness, a history of brain tumor, or positive neurologic findings, however, neuroimaging was of low yield. Given the heterogeneity and potential limitations of these studies, further research on this topic is required.

Using HEART2 score to risk stratify chest pain patients in the Emergency Department: an observational study

BACKGROUND

A significant number of chest pain patients had previous cardiac imaging tests (CIT) performed before being presented to the Emergency Department (ED). The HEART (history, electrocardiogram, age, risk factors, and troponin) score has been used to risk-stratify chest pain patients in the ED, but not particularly for patients with CIT performed. We aim to modify the current HEART score with the addition of most recent CIT findings (referred to as HEART2 score), to predict a 30-day major adverse cardiac event (MACE) among ED chest pain patients, compare the performance accuracy of using HEART versus HEART2 score for 30-day MACE outcome predictions, and further determine the value of HEART2 in a subset group of ED chest pain patients (i.e., ones with previous CIT).

METHODS

This is a single-center observational study. We included chest pain patients with HEART scores calculated during their index ED visits. A modified HEART2 score was developed with the addition of CIT findings as one of the HEART2 components. Patients were divided into three groups, including low (≤ 3), moderate (4-6), and high-risk HEART/HEART2 scores (≥ 7). MACE occurrence of a patient with different risks of HEART and HEART2 scores and overall performance accuracy of HEART versus HEART2 score predicting MACE outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

We included a total of 9419 chest pain patients at ED, among which one out of five patients (1874/9419) had previous CIT performed. Fewer (38.2%) of such patients had low-risk HEART scores in comparison to 55.5% of low-risk HEART2 scores (p < 0.001). The MACE outcomes were similar in low-risk HEART patients compared with low-risk HEART2 patients (2.2% versus 3.1%, p = 0.3021). The overall performance accuracy of using the HEART2 score to stratify chest pain patients with previous CIT was better than using the HEART score's (AUC 0.74 versus 0.71, p = 0.0082).

CONCLUSIONS

Using the HEART2 score might be suitable to stratify low-to-moderate risk chest pain patients at ED with a similar 30-days MACE occurrence compared to the HEART score. More importantly, with the use of similar low-risk criteria (HEART2 ≤ 3), over 45% more chest pain patients with previous CIT performed could be discharged directly from ED.

Higher intensity of 72-h noninvasive cardiac test referral does not improve short-term outcomes among emergency department patients with chest pain

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether referral for cardiac noninvasive testing (NIT) following emergency department (ED) chest pain encounters improves short-term outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients presenting with chest pain, without ST-elevation myocardial infarction or myocardial injury by serum troponin testing, between 2013 and 2019 to 21 EDs within an integrated health care system. We examined the association between NIT referral (within 72 h of the ED encounter) and a primary outcome of 60-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Secondary outcomes were 60-day MACE without coronary revascularization (MACE-CR) and 60-day all-cause mortality. To account for confounding by indication for NIT, we grouped patient encounters into ranked tertiles of NIT referral intensity based on the likelihood of 72-h NIT referral associated with the initially assigned emergency physician, relative to local peers and within discrete time periods. Associations between NIT referral-intensity tertile and outcomes were assessed using risk-adjusted multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 210,948 eligible patient encounters, 72-h NIT referral frequency was 11.9%, 18.3%, and 25.9% in low, intermediate, and high NIT referral-intensity encounters, respectively. Compared with the low referral-intensity tertile, there was a higher risk of 60-day MACE within the high referral-intensity tertile (odds ratio [OR] = 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.04 to 1.17) due to more coronary revascularizations without corresponding differences in MACE-CR or all-cause mortality. In analyses stratified by patients' estimated risk (HEART score; 50.5% lower risk, 38.7% moderate risk, 10.8% higher risk), the difference in 60-day MACE was primarily attributable to moderate-risk encounters (OR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.08 to 1.24), with no differences among either lower- (OR = 1.10, 95% CI = 0.92 to 1.31) or higher- (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.90 to 1.14) risk encounters.

CONCLUSION

Higher referral intensity for 72-h NIT was associated with higher risk of coronary revascularization but no difference in adverse events within 60 days. These findings further call into question the urgency of NIT among ED patients without objective evidence of myocardial injury.