The diagnostic value of clinical symptoms in women and men presenting with chest pain at the emergency department, a prospective cohort study

Sex differences in antiplatelet therapy: state-of-the art

Antiplatelet therapy is a cornerstone of secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). However, current guidelines are based on data derived primarily from men, as women are generally underrepresented in trials. Consequently, there are insufficient and inconsistent data on the effect of antiplatelet drugs in women. Sex differences were reported in platelet reactivity, patient management, and clinical outcomes after treatment with aspirin, P2Y₁₂ inhibitor, or dual antiplatelet therapy. To evaluate whether sex-specific antiplatelet therapy is needed, in this review we discuss (i) how sex affects platelet biology and response to antiplatelet agents, (ii) how sex and gender differences translate into clinical challenges and (iii) how the cardiological care in women might be improved. Finally, we highlight the challenges faced in clinical practice regarding the different needs and characteristics of female and male patients with CVD and address issues requiring further investigation.

Prediction of disorders with significant coronary lesions using machine learning in patients admitted with chest symptom

BACKGROUND

The early prediction of significant coronary artery lesion, including coronary vasospasm, have yet to be studied. It is essential to discern the disorders with significant coronary lesions (SCDs) requiring coronary angiography from mimicking disease. We aimed to determine which of all clinical variables were more important using conventional logistic regression (cLR) and machine learning (ML).

MATERIALS

Of 3382 patients with chest pain/discomfort or dyspnea in whom CAG was performed, 1893 were included. All clinical data were divided as follows (i): Demographics, history, and physical examination; (ii): (i) plus electrocardiography; and (iii): (ii) plus echocardiography, and analyzed by cLR and ML.

RESULTS

In multivariable analysis via cLR, the AUC and accuracy of the model using the final 20 variables were 0.795 and 72.62%, respectively. In multivariable analysis via ML, the best AUCs in the internal validation were 0.8 with (i), 0.81 with (ii), 0.83 with (iii), and in external validation, the best AUCs were 0.71 with (i), 0.74 with (ii), and 0.79 with (iii). The best AUCs and accuracy of the fittest model including 21 importance variables by ML were 0.81 and 72.48% in internal validation; and 0.75 and 70.5% in external validation, respectively. The importance variables in ML and cLR were similar, but slightly different and the additional discriminators via ML were found.

CONCLUSION

The assessment using the fittest importance variables can assist physicians in differentiating mimicking diseases in which coronary angiography may not be required in patients suspected of having acute coronary syndrome in emergency department.

Symptoms of Infarction in Women: Is There a Real Difference Compared to Men? A Systematic Review of the Literature with Meta-Analysis

(1) Context: The management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is based on a rapid diagnosis. The aim of this study was to focus on the ACS symptoms differences according to gender, in order to contribute to the improvement of knowledge regarding the clinical presentation in women. (2) Methods: We searched for relevant literature in two electronic databases, and analyzed the symptom presentation for patients with suspected ACS. Fifteen prospective studies were included, with a total sample size of 10,730. (3) Results: During a suspected ACS, women present more dyspnea, arm pain, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, palpitations and pain at the shoulder than men, with RR (95%CI) of 1.13 [1.10; 1.17], 1.30 [1.05; 1.59], 1,40 [1.26; 1.56], 1.08 [1.01; 1.16], 1.67 [1.49; 1.86], 1.78 [1.02; 3.13], respectively. They are older by (95%CI) 4.15 [2.28; 6.03] years compared to men. The results are consistent in the analysis of the ACS confirmed subgroup. (4) Conclusions: We have shown that there is a gender-based symptomatic difference and a female presentation for ACS. The “typical” or “atypical” semiology of ACS symptoms should no longer be used.

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: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This executive summary of the 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 studies, 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. These guidelines present 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: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This executive summary of the 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 studies, 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. These guidelines present 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.

Characteristic differences of chest pain in male and female patients with acute coronary syndrome: A pilot study

Background: The typical sign or main symptom in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients is chest pain, which is an initial benchmark or early sign for diagnosis. Certain factors, such as gender differences, the presence of diabetes mellitus or other clinical conditions, may make the patient not realize they have ACS. Therefore, this study aims to identify the characteristics of chest pain symptoms in male and female patients with ACS.

Design and Methods: This is a non-experimental quantitative study, namely analytical observation using a cross-sectional approach within 4 months (January-April 2019). Furthermore, the samples were 53 ACS patients (28 male and 25 female).

Results: The chest pain characteristics that have a significant relationship with gender differences in ACS patients are shown based on the aspects of location, pain duration and quality. Male patients are more likely to feel pain at the left or middle chest, the duration is between <20 to >20 min with moderate pain quality, which tends to become severe, while females are more likely to feel pain at the chest which radiates to the neck and chin, the duration is usually >20 min, with mild to moderate pain quality.

Conclusions: The result showed a significant difference in chest pain characteristics in male and female patients with ACS. Regarding location, duration and quality of chest pain, male ACS patients mostly have more typical symptoms, while females’ symptoms are atypical.

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.

Coronary artery disease prediction in women and men using chest pain characteristics and risk factors: an observational study in outpatient clinics

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic value of non-acute chest pain characteristics for coronary artery disease in women and men referred to outpatient cardiology clinics.

DESIGN AND SETTING

This is an observational study performed at outpatient cardiology centres of the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

The study population consisted of 1028 patients with non-acute chest pain (505 women).

ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

Twenty-four women (5%) and 75 men (15%) were diagnosed with coronary artery disease by invasive coronary angiography or CT angiography during regular care follow-up. Elastic net regression was performed to assess which chest pain characteristics and risk factors were of diagnostic value. The overall model selected age, provocation by temperature or stress, relief at rest and functional class as determinants and was accurate in both sexes (area under the curve (AUC) of 0.76 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.85) in women and 0.83 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.88) in men). Both sex-specific models selected age, pressuring nature, radiation, duration, frequency, progress, provocation and relief at rest as determinants. The female model additionally selected dyspnoea, body mass index, hypertension and smoking while the male model additionally selected functional class and diabetes. The sex-specific models performed better than the overall model, but more so in women (AUC: 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.96) than in men (AUC: 0.84, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

In both sexes, the diagnostic value of non-acute chest pain characteristics and risk factors for coronary artery disease was high. Provocation, relief at rest and functional class of chest pain were the most powerful diagnostic predictors in both women and men. When stratified by sex the performance of the model improved, mostly in women.

[Standardized collection of presenting complaints in the emergency room : Integration of coded presenting complaints into the electronic medical record system of an emergency department and their value for health care research]

BACKGROUND

The point of entry of a patient in emergency care is a symptom or a complaint. To evaluate subsequent processes in an emergency department until a diagnosis is made, this information has to be taken into account.

OBJECTIVES

We report the introduction of coded presenting complaints into the electronic medical record system of an emergency department and describe the patients based on these data.

METHODS

The CEDIS presenting complaint list was integrated into the emergency department information system of an emergency department (38,000 patients/year). After 8 months, we performed an exploratory analysis of the most common presenting complaints. Furthermore, we identified the most frequent diagnoses for presenting complaint "shortness of breath" and the most frequent presenting complaints for the diagnosis of sepsis.

RESULTS

After implementing the presenting complaint list, a presenting complaint code was assigned to each patient. In our sample (26,330 cases), "extremity pain and injury" comprised the largest group of patients (29.5%). "Chest pain-cardiac features" (3.7%) and "extremity weakness/symptoms of cerebrovascular accident" (2.4%) were the main cardiac and neurologic complaints, respectively. They were mostly triaged as urgent (>80%) and hospitalized in critical care units (>50%). The main diagnosis for presenting complaint "shortness of breath" was heart failure (25.1%), while the main presenting complaint for the diagnosis sepsis was "shortness of breath" (18.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Containing 171 presenting complaints, this classification was implemented successfully without providing extensive staff training. The documentation of coded presenting complaints enables symptom-based analysis of the health care provided in emergency departments.