Diagnostic accuracy of the TIMI risk score in patients with chest pain in the emergency department: a meta-analysis

Assessment and Application of the Hear Score in Remote Emergency Medicine Outposts in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Background and Objectives. In emergency departments, chest pain is a common concern, highlighting the critical importance of distinguishing between acute coronary syndrome and other potential causes. Our research aimed to introduce and implement the HEAR score, specifically, in remote emergency outposts in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Materials and Methods. This follow-up study conducted a retrospective analysis of a prospective cohort consisting of patients who were admitted to the remote emergency medicine outposts in Canton Sarajevo and Zenica from 1 November to 31 December 2023. Results. This study comprised 103 (12.9%) patients with low-risk HEAR scores and 338 (83.8%) with high-risk HEAR scores, primarily female (221, 56.9%), with a mean age of 63.5 ± 11.2). Patients with low-risk HEAR scores were significantly younger (50.5 ± 15.6 vs. 65.9 ± 12.1), had fewer smokers (p < 0.05), and exhibited a lower incidence of cardiovascular risk factors compared to those with high-risk HEAR scores. Low-risk HEAR score for prediction of AMI had a sensitivity of 97.1% (95% CI 89.9-99.6%); specificity of 27.3% (95% CI 22.8-32.1%); PPV of 19.82% (95% CI 18.67-21.03%), and NPV of 98.08% (95% CI 92.80-99.51%). Within 30 days of the admission to the emergency department outpost, out of all 441 patients, 100 (22.7%) were diagnosed with MACE, with AMI 69 (15.6%), 3 deaths (0.7%), 6 (1.4%) had a CABG, and 22 (4.9%) underwent PCI. A low-risk HEAR score had a sensitivity of 97.0% (95% CI 91.7-99.4%) and specificity of 27.3% (95% CI 22.8-32.1%); PPV of 25.5% (95% CI 25.59-28.37%); NPV of 97.14% (95% CI 91.68-99.06%) for 30-day MACE. Conclusions. In conclusion, the outcomes of this study align with existing research, underscoring the effectiveness of the HEAR score in risk stratification for patients with chest pain. In practical terms, the implementation of the HEAR score in clinical decision-making processes holds significant promise.

ChatGPT provides inconsistent risk-stratification of patients with atraumatic chest pain

BACKGROUND

ChatGPT-4 is a large language model with promising healthcare applications. However, its ability to analyze complex clinical data and provide consistent results is poorly known. Compared to validated tools, this study evaluated ChatGPT-4's risk stratification of simulated patients with acute nontraumatic chest pain.

METHODS

Three datasets of simulated case studies were created: one based on the TIMI score variables, another on HEART score variables, and a third comprising 44 randomized variables related to non-traumatic chest pain presentations. ChatGPT-4 independently scored each dataset five times. Its risk scores were compared to calculated TIMI and HEART scores. A model trained on 44 clinical variables was evaluated for consistency.

RESULTS

ChatGPT-4 showed a high correlation with TIMI and HEART scores (r = 0.898 and 0.928, respectively), but the distribution of individual risk assessments was broad. ChatGPT-4 gave a different risk 45-48% of the time for a fixed TIMI or HEART score. On the 44-variable model, a majority of the five ChatGPT-4 models agreed on a diagnosis category only 56% of the time, and risk scores were poorly correlated (r = 0.605).

CONCLUSION

While ChatGPT-4 correlates closely with established risk stratification tools regarding mean scores, its inconsistency when presented with identical patient data on separate occasions raises concerns about its reliability. The findings suggest that while large language models like ChatGPT-4 hold promise for healthcare applications, further refinement and customization are necessary, particularly in the clinical risk assessment of atraumatic chest pain patients.

Factors of Hospital Mortality in Men and Women with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction - An Observational, Retrospective, Single Centre Study

Purpose

There are well-known gender differences in mortality of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Our purpose was to assess factors of hospital mortality separately for men and women with STEMI, which are less well known.

Patients and Methods

In 2018-2019, 485 men and 214 women with STEMI underwent treatment with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We retrospectively compared baseline characteristics, treatments and hospital complications between men and women, as well as between nonsurviving and surviving men and women with STEMI.

Results

Primary PCI was performed in 94% of men and 91.1% of women with STEMI, respectively. The in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in women than in men (14% vs 8%, p=0.019). Hospital mortality in both genders was associated significantly to older age, heart failure, prior resuscitation, acute kidney injury, to less likely performed and less successful primary PCI and additionally in men to hospital infection and in women to bleeding. In men and women ≥65 years, mortality was similar (13.3% vs 17.8%, p = 0.293).

Conclusion

Factors of hospital mortality were similar in men and women with STEMI, except bleeding was more likely observed in nonsurviving women and infection in nonsurviving men.

Performance of the Risk Scores for Predicting In-Hospital Mortality in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome in a Chinese Cohort

Background

The prognosis of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) varies greatly, and risk assessment models can help clinicians to identify and manage high-risk patients. While the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) model is widely used, the clinical pathways for acute coronary syndromes (CPACS), which was constructed based on the Chinese population, and acute coronary treatment and intervention outcomes network (ACTION) have not yet been validated in the Chinese population.

Methods

Patients with ACS who underwent coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention from 2011 to 2020, were retrospectively recruited and the appropriate corresponding clinical indicators was obtained. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. The performance of the GRACE, GRACE 2.0, ACTION, thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) and CPACS risk models was evaluated and compared.

Results

A total of 19,237 patients with ACS were included. Overall, in-hospital mortality was 2.2%. ACTION showed the highest accuracy in predicting discriminated risk (c-index 0.945, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.922-0.955), but the calibration was not satisfactory. GRACE and GRACE 2.0 did not significantly differ in discrimination (p = 0.1480). GRACE showed the most accurate calibration in all patients and in the subgroup analysis of all models. CPACS (c-index 0.841, 95% CI 0.821-0.861) and TIMI (c-index 0.811, 95% CI 0.787-0.835) did not outperform (c-index 0.926, 95% CI 0.911-0.940).

Conclusions

In contemporary Chinese ACS patients, the ACTION risk model's calibration is not satisfactory, although outperformed the gold standard GRACE model in predicting hospital mortality. The CPACS model developed for Chinese patients did not show better predictive performance than the GRACE model.

Snapshot of suspected acute coronary syndrome assessment processes in the emergency department: A national cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

The Snapshot of Suspected ACS Assessment (SSAASY) study aims to describe the assessment processes for patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in Australian EDs, and to compare these processes with the National Heart Foundation of Australia and Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand (NHFA/CSANZ) guidelines.

METHODS

Between March and May 2021, a cross-sectional survey of Australian EDs was undertaken to investigate the assessment strategies used within the ED. All public and private hospitals identified as having dedicated EDs were invited to participate. Respondents provided data on hospital, ED and cardiac service characteristics. They also provided data on the risk stratification process recommended within their department (risk scores, troponin testing, objective testing for coronary artery disease). Awareness of the NHFA/CSANZ guidelines was assessed.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 109/162 departments (67%). Most sites (n = 100, 92%) reported using dedicated protocols developed by ED clinicians that included risk stratification scores. Highly sensitive troponin assays were used at 103 (94%) sites. Serial troponin testing was performed over 2 h for low-risk patients in 53 (49%) sites and 2-3 h for intermediate and high-risk patients in 74 (68%) sites. Further investigations included exercise stress tests (48%) and stress echocardiography (38%), with 45% of sites ordering outpatient investigations.

CONCLUSIONS

The SSAASY study reported the strategies used to assess suspected ACS. In line with current NHFA/CSANZ guidelines, highly sensitive troponin assays are widely utilised. However, serial sampling intervals were longer than guideline recommendations, suggesting a translational gap between guidelines and clinical practice.

Risk Prediction Models for Ischemic Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome

Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has a high incidence of adverse cardiovascular events, even after early invasive treatment. Patients may still have a poor prognosis after discharge. The keys to the long-term survival of patients with ACS include effective treatment in a timely manner and identification of those patients who are at higher risk for long-term adverse events. Therefore, several nations have now devised a range of risk assessment models to provide data for accurately formulating treatment plans for patients with various risk levels following an ACS to prevent short and long-term cardiovascular events. The purpose of this article is to review the risk scores associated with mortality and ischemic events in patients with ACS. By using the clinical risk prediction score, we can accurately and effectively judge the prognosis of patients, so as to take a more reasonable treatment.

Differences in cardiac testing resource utilization using two different risk stratification schemes

OBJECTIVE

Assess whether changing an emergency department (ED) chest pain pathway from utilizing the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score for risk stratification to an approach utilizing the History, EKG, Age, Risk, Troponin (HEART) score was associated with reductions in healthcare resource utilization.

METHODS

A retrospective, quasi-experimental study using difference-in-differences and interrupted time series specifications evaluated all ED patients with a chest pain encounter from 8/2015 to 7/2019 at a large academic medical center. We included patients age ≥ 18 with negative troponin testing discharged from the ED. Our standardized care pathway utilized TIMI for risk stratification until 09/2017 and HEART thereafter. We evaluated patients undergoing hospital-based cardiac diagnostic testing (CDT), length of stay (LOS), and 30-day Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) at the intervention site before and after the pathway change and compared these outcomes to a similar control site within the health system for the difference-in-differences specification.

RESULTS

During the study period, 6.3% (450 of 7117) of patients in the TIMI cohort and 7.2% (546 of 7623) in the HEART cohort among 400,965 total ED visits underwent CDT. In a multivariable analysis, transition to the HEART pathway was associated with greater odds of receiving CDT (odds ratio 2.88 [95% CI 1.21 to 6.86]), a reduction in LOS of 34 min (95% CI 2.2 to 67.6), and no significant difference in 30-day MACE.

CONCLUSION

The transition from TIMI to HEART was associated with mixed consequences for healthcare resource utilization, including increased CDT but reduced length of stay.

Use of Coronary CT Angiography to Predict Obstructive Lesions in Patients with Chest Pain without Enzyme and ST-Segment Elevation

It is challenging to rule out acute coronary syndrome among chest pain patients without both ST-segment elevation in electrocardiography and troponin elevation at emergency departments (ED). The purpose of this study was to develop a prediction model for rapidly determining the occurrence of significant stenosis in coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). Retrospective observational cohort study was conducted with 904 patients who had presented with chest pain without troponin elevation and ST-segment changes and underwent CCTA between January 2017 and December 2018. The primary endpoint was the presence of significant stenosis on CCTA, defined as narrowing above 70% diameter. The logistic regression model was used for development a new predictive model. One hundred and thirty-four patients (14.8%) were shown severe stenosis. The independent associated factors for significant stenosis were age ≥65 years, male, diabetes, history of acute coronary syndrome, and typical chest pain. Based these results, we developed a new prediction model. The area under the curve was 0.782 (95% confidence interval 0.742-0.822). Moreover, score of ≥5 was chosen as cut-off values with 86.6% sensitivity and 56.4% specificity. In conclusion, among chest pain patients without ST changes and troponin elevation, the new score will be helpful to identify potential candidate for CCTA such as patients with significant stenosis.

30 day predicted outcome in undifferentiated chest pain: multicenter validation of the HEART score in Tunisian population

BACKGROUND

Chest pain remains one of the most challenging serious complaints in the emergency department (ED). A prompt and accurate risk stratification tool for chest pain patients is paramount to help physcian effectively progrnosticate outcomes. HEART score is considered one of the best scores for chest pain risk stratification. However, most validation studies of HEART score were not performed in populations different from those included in the original one.

OBJECTIVE

To validate HEART score as a prognostication tool, among Tunisian ED patients with undifferentiated chest pain.

METHODS

Our prospective, multicenter study enrolled adult patients presenting with chest pain at chest pain units. Patients over 30 years of age with a primary complaint of chest pain were enrolled. HEART score was calculated for every patient. The primary outcome was major cardiovascular events (MACE) occurrence, including all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and coronary revascularisation over 30 days following the ED visit. The discriminative power of HEART score was evaluated by the area under the ROC curve. A calibration analysis of the HEART score in this population was performed using Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of test.

RESULTS

We enrolled 3880 patients (age 56.3; 59.5% males). The application of HEART score showed that most patients were in intermediate risk category (55.3%). Within 30 days of ED visit, MACE were reported in 628 (16.2%) patients, with an incidence of 1.2% in the low risk group, 10.8% in the intermediate risk group and 62.4% in the high risk group. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.87 (95% CI 0.85-0.88). HEART score was not well calibrated (χ² statistic = 12.34; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

HEART score showed a good discrimination performance in predicting MACE occurrence at 30 days for Tunisian patients with undifferentiated acute chest pain. Heart score was not well calibrated in our population.

Age-adjusted quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score for predicting mortality and disease severity in children with infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the age-adjusted quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (qSOFA) for predicting mortality and disease severity in pediatric patients with suspected or confirmed infection. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Eleven studies with a total of 172,569 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of the age-adjusted qSOFA for predicting mortality and disease severity were 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.81), 0.71 (95% CI 0.36-0.91), and 6.57 (95% CI 4.46-9.67), respectively. The area under the summary receiver-operating characteristic curve was 0.733. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for predicting mortality were 0.73 (95% CI 0.66-0.79) and 0.63 (95% CI 0.21-0.92), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for predicting disease severity were 0.73 (95% CI 0.21-0.97) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.11-0.98), respectively. The performance of the age-adjusted qSOFA for predicting mortality and disease severity was better in emergency department patients than in intensive care unit patients. The age-adjusted qSOFA has moderate predictive power and can help in rapidly identifying at-risk children, but its utility may be limited by its insufficient sensitivity.

Indirect comparison of TIMI, HEART and GRACE for predicting major cardiovascular events in patients admitted to the emergency department with acute chest pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The study aimed to compare the predictive values of the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI); History, Electrocardiography, Age, Risk factors and Troponin (HEART) and Global Registry in Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) scoring systems for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in acute chest pain (ACP) patients admitted to the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library from their inception to June 2020; we compared the following parameters: sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (PLR and NLR), diagnostic OR (DOR) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC).

RESULTS

The pooled sensitivity and specificity for TIMI, HEART and GRACE were 0.95 and 0.36, 0.96 and 0.50, and 0.78 and 0.56, respectively. The pooled PLR and NLR for TIMI, HEART and GRACE were 1.49 and 0.13, 1.94 and 0.08, and 1.77 and 0.40, respectively. The pooled DOR for TIMI, HEART and GRACE was 9.18, 17.92 and 4.00, respectively. The AUC for TIMI, HEART and GRACE was 0.80, 0.80 and 0.70, respectively. Finally, the results of indirect comparison suggested the superiority of values of TIMI and HEART to those of GRACE for predicting MACEs, while there were no significant differences between TIMI and HEART for predicting MACEs.

CONCLUSIONS

TIMI and HEART were superior to GRACE for predicting MACE risk in ACP patients admitted to the ED.

Previously undiagnosed scoliosis presenting as pleuritic chest pain in the emergency department - a case series and a validating retrospective audit

Background

Chest pain is one of the commonest presenting complaints in urgent/emergency care, with a lifelong prevalence of up to 25% in the adult population. Pleuritic chest pain is a subset of high investigation burden because of a diverse range of possible causes varying from simple musculoskeletal conditions to pulmonary embolism.

Case series

Among otherwise fit and healthy adult patients presenting in our emergency department with sudden onset of unilateral pleuritic chest pain, within 1 month we identified a cohort of five patients with pin-point tenderness in one specific costo-sternal joint often with referred pain to the back. All cases had apparent and, previously undiagnosed mild/moderate scoliosis.

Methods

To confirm and validate the observed association between scoliosis and pleuritic chest pain, a retrospective audit was designed and performed using the hospital’s electronic medical record system to reassess all consecutive adult chest pain patients.

Results

The Odds Ratio for having chest pain with scoliosis was 30.8 [95%CI 1.71–553.37], twenty times higher than suggested by prevalence data.

Discussion

In scoliosis the pathologic lateral curvature of the spine adversely affects the functional anatomy of both the spine and ribcage. In our hypothesis the chest wall asymmetry enables minor slip/subluxation of a rib either in the costo-sternal and/or costovertebral junction exerting direct pressure on the intercostal nerve causing pleuritic pain.

Conclusion

Thorough physical examination of the anterior and posterior chest wall is key to identify underlying scoliosis in otherwise fit patients presenting with sudden onset of pleuritic pain. Incorporating assessment for scoliosis in the low-risk chest pain protocols/tools may help reducing the length of stay in the emergency department and, facilitate speedy but safe discharge with increased patient satisfaction.

Prevalence and Predictors of Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in Nonlow-risk Acute Chest Pain Patients Who Rule Out for Myocardial Infarction in the High-sensitivity Troponin Era

OBJECTIVES

The best management approach for chest pain patients who rule out for myocardial infarction (MI) in the high-sensitivity troponin (hsTn) era remains elusive. Patients, especially those with nonlow clinical risk scores, are often referred for inpatient ischemic testing to uncover obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Whether the prevalence of obstructive CAD in this cohort is high enough to justify routine testing is not known.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 1517 emergency department chest pain patients who ruled out for MI by virtue of a stable high-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT) levels (defined as <5 ng/L intermeasurements increase) and were admitted for inpatient testing.

RESULTS

Abnormal ischemia evaluation (including 5.9% with evidence of fixed wall motion or perfusion defects) was 11.9%. Of those undergoing invasive angiography (n = 292), significant coronary stenoses (≥70% or unstable lesions) and multivessel CAD occurred in 16.8% and 5.5%, respectively. In a multivariate logistic regression model, known CAD, prior MI, chest pain character, mildly elevated hsTnT, and left ventricular ejection fraction <40% were predictive of an abnormal ischemia evaluation result, whereas electrocardiography findings and the modified History, EKG, Age, Risk factors, and troponin (HEART) score were not. Of note, 30-day adverse cardiac events were strikingly low at 0.4% with no deaths despite an overwhelming majority (>90%) of patients scoring intermediate or high on the modified HEART score.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable percentage of acute chest pain patients who rule out for MI by hsTn had evidence of obstructive CAD, and the modified HEART score was not predictive of an abnormal ischemia evaluation.

In Search of an Optimal Subset of ECG Features to Augment the Diagnosis of Acute Coronary Syndrome at the Emergency Department

Background Classical ST-T waveform changes on standard 12-lead ECG have limited sensitivity in detecting acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the emergency department. Numerous novel ECG features have been previously proposed to augment clinicians' decision during patient evaluation, yet their clinical utility remains unclear. Methods and Results This was an observational study of consecutive patients evaluated for suspected ACS (Cohort 1 n=745, age 59±17, 42% female, 15% ACS; Cohort 2 n=499, age 59±16, 49% female, 18% ACS). Out of 554 temporal-spatial ECG waveform features, we used domain knowledge to select a subset of 65 physiology-driven features that are mechanistically linked to myocardial ischemia and compared their performance to a subset of 229 data-driven features selected by multiple machine learning algorithms. We then used random forest to select a final subset of 73 most important ECG features that had both data- and physiology-driven basis to ACS prediction and compared their performance to clinical experts. On testing set, a regularized logistic regression classifier based on the 73 hybrid features yielded a stable model that outperformed clinical experts in predicting ACS, with 10% to 29% of cases reclassified correctly. Metrics of nondipolar electrical dispersion (ie, circumferential ischemia), ventricular activation time (ie, transmural conduction delays), QRS and T axes and angles (ie, global remodeling), and principal component analysis ratio of ECG waveforms (ie, regional heterogeneity) played an important role in the improved reclassification performance. Conclusions We identified a subset of novel ECG features predictive of ACS with a fully interpretable model highly adaptable to clinical decision support applications. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT04237688.

Emergency department routine data and the diagnosis of acute ischemic heart disease in patients with atypical chest pain

Background

Due to an aging population and the increasing proportion of patients with various comorbidities, the number of patients with acute ischemic heart disease (AIHD) who present to the emergency department (ED) with atypical chest pain is increasing. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a prediction model for AIHD in patients with atypical chest pain.

Methods and results

A chest pain workup registry, ED administrative database, and clinical data warehouse database were analyzed and integrated by using nonidentifiable key factors to create a comprehensive clinical dataset in a single academic ED from 2014 to 2018. Demographic findings, vital signs, and routine laboratory test results were assessed for their ability to predict AIHD. An extreme gradient boosting (XGB) model was developed and evaluated, and its performance was compared to that of a single-variable model and logistic regression model. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was calculated to assess discrimination. A calibration plot and partial dependence plots were also used in the analyses. Overall, 4,978 patients were analyzed. Of the 3,833 patients in the training cohort, 453 (11.8%) had AIHD; of the 1,145 patients in the validation cohort, 166 (14.5%) had AIHD. XGB, troponin (single-variable), and logistic regression models showed similar discrimination power (AUROC [95% confidence interval]: XGB model, 0.75 [0.71–0.79]; troponin model, 0.73 [0.69–0.77]; logistic regression model, 0.73 [0.70–0.79]). Most patients were classified as non-AIHD; calibration was good in patients with a low predicted probability of AIHD in all prediction models. Unlike in the logistic regression model, a nonlinear relationship-like threshold and U-shaped relationship between variables and the probability of AIHD were revealed in the XGB model.

Conclusion

We developed and validated an AIHD prediction model for patients with atypical chest pain by using an XGB model.

The utility of risk scores when evaluating for acute myocardial infarction using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I

Risk scores including the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score; History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk Factors, and Troponin (HEART) score; and Simplified Emergency Department Assessment of Chest Pain Score (sEDACS) have been used to evaluate patients with symptoms suggestive of acute myocardial infarct (AMI). This study assessed prognostic utility of cardiac risk stratification scores when augmented with a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin-I assay (hs-cTnI).

METHODS

This study enrolled 2,505 suspected AMI patients at 29 hospitals in the United States from April 2015 to April 2016. Blood samples were tested for hs-cTnI on the Atellica IM TnIH Assay (Siemens Healthineers). Patients were considered low risk for death/AMI with a TIMI score = 0, HEART ≤3, sEDACS ≤15, and hs-cTnI <45 ng/L (99th percentile) at time 0 and 2-3 hours.

RESULTS

There were 2,336 patients included after exclusions for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or incomplete data. At 30 days, 283 patients (12.1%) had been diagnosed with AMI, and there were 24 (1.0%) deaths and 213 (9.1%) revascularizations. Of 298 patients with death or AMI, 258 (86.6%) had elevated hs-cTnI. The HEART score and sEDACS identified 34.5% and 36.6% of patients as low risk, respectively. This was significantly more than the 12.1% identified by the TIMI score (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

The TIMI, HEART, and sEDACS scores all identify low-risk patients when combined with hs-cTnI measurements. The HEART score and sEDACS identified more low-risk patients compared to the TIMI score. These patients could be considered for discharge from the emergency department without further testing.

A comparative 30-day outcome analysis of inpatient evaluation vs outpatient testing in patients presenting with chest pain in the high-sensitivity troponin era. A propensity score matched case-control retrospective study

Background

The best disposition of chest pain patients who rule out for myocardial infarction (MI) but have non‐low clinical risk scores in the high‐sensitivity troponin era is not well studied.

Hypothesis

In carefully selected patients who rule out for MI, and have a high‐sensitivity troponin T ≤ 50 ng/L with an absolute increase less than 5 ng/L on repeat measurements, early emergency room (ER) discharge might be equivalent to inpatient evaluation in regards to 30‐day incidence of adverse cardiac events (ACEs) regardless of the clinical risk score.

Methods

A total of 12 847 chest pain patients presenting to our health system ERs from January 2017 to September 2019 were retrospectively investigated. A propensity score matching algorithm was used to account for baseline differences between admitted and discharged cohorts. We then estimated and compared the incidence of 30‐day and 1‐year composite ACEs (MI, urgent revascularization, or cardiovascular death) between both groups. A multivariate Cox regression model was used to evaluate the effect of admission on outcomes.

Results

A total of 2060 patients were matched in 1:1 fashion. The primary endpoint of 30‐day composite ACEs occurred in 0.6% and 0.4% of the admission and the discharged cohorts, respectively (P = .76). One‐year composite ACEs was also similar between both groups (4% vs 3.7%, P = .75). In a multivariate Cox regression model, the effect of inpatient evaluation was neutral (hazard ratio 1.1, confidence interval 0.62‐1.9, P = .75).

Conclusions

Inpatient evaluation was not associated with better outcomes in our selected group of patients. Larger‐scale randomized trials are needed to confirm our findings.

Comparative outcome analysis of stable mildly elevated high sensitivity troponin T in patients presenting with chest pain. A single-center retrospective cohort study

Background

The ideal high-sensitivity troponin (hsTn) cutoff for identifying those at low risk of 30 days events is debated; however, the 99th percentile overall or gender-specific upper reference limit (URL) is most commonly used. The magnitude of risk and the best management strategy for those with low-level hsTn elevation hasn't been extensively studied.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis including 4396 chest pain patients (542 with low-level hsTn elevation) who ruled out for myocardial infarction (MI), had a stable high-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT) levels (defined as < 5 ng/l inter-measurements increase in hsTnT levels), and were discharged from the emergency department without further ischemic testing. The aim of the study was to compare the 30-day incidence of adverse cardiac events (ACE) between patients with undetectable high-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT) (group 1), patients with hsTnT within the 99th percentile sex-specific URL (group 2), and patients with low-level hsTnT elevation (between the 99th percentile URL and ≤ 50 ng/l) (group 3).

Results

30-day event rates were very low 0.1%, 0.6%, and 0.4% for hsTnT groups 1, 2, and 3 respectively (overall P = 0.041, for groups 2 & 3 interaction P = 0.74). 30-day all-cause mortality, as well as 1-year all-cause and cardiovascular mortalities, occurred more frequently in those with low-level hsTnT elevation as did 1-year composite ACE.

Conclusion

In conclusion, 30-day adverse event rates were very low in those with stable low-level hsTnT elevation who ruled out for MI and were discharged from the emergency department without further inpatient testing.

Outcomes of Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With a Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Score of Five or Higher

Background Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a treatment of choice for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Of the various risk stratification scores that have been introduced, the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) score is among the most used modalities. Patients with a TIMI score of five or higher are classified as high-risk patients with higher rates of adverse events. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the rate of adverse events after primary PCI in patients presenting with STEMI and a TIMI score of five or higher. Methodology This descriptive study was conducted at the cardiology department of the Liaquat National Hospital, Karachi, from February 2018 to August 2018. The patients included in this study consisted of a total of 150 men and women who presented to the ED with concerns of chest pain and were diagnosed with STEMI and had a TIMI score of five or higher. Consultant cardiologists performed primary PCI procedures, and any post-procedure adverse events were recorded during the patients' hospital stays (up to one week), including mortality, heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and ventricular arrhythmias. Results The study population was 83.3% male and 16.7% female patients, and the mean age was 54.0 ± 9.4 years. The mean BMI was 27.34 ± 2.76 kg/m². The mean TIMI score was 9.19 ± 2.71, with a TIMI score higher than eight for 52.7% of patients. Death was observed in 18.7% of cases, heart failure in 21.3% of cases, cardiogenic shock in 13.3% of cases, and ventricular arrhythmia in 22.0% of cases. Conclusion A TIMI risk score of five or higher can identify patients at high risk not only for mortality, but also for heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and ventricular arrhythmias.

Factors influencing physician risk estimates for acute cardiac events in emergency patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

Emergency physicians frequently assess risk of acute cardiac events (ACEs) in patients with undifferentiated chest pain. Such estimates have been shown to have moderate to high sensitivity for ACE but are conservative. Little is known about the factors implicitly used by physicians to determine the pretest probability of risk. This study sought to identify the accuracy of physician risk estimates for ACE in patients presenting to the ED with chest pain and to identify the demographic and clinical information emergency physicians use in their determination of patient risk.

METHODS

This study used data from two prospective studies of consenting adult patients presenting to the ED with symptoms of possible acute coronary syndrome. ED physicians estimated the pretest probability of ACE. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to identify predictors of physician risk estimates. Logistic regression was used to determine whether there was a correlation between physicians' estimated risk and ACE.

RESULTS

Increasing age, male sex, abnormal ECG features, heavy/crushing chest pain and risk factors were correlated with physician risk estimates. Physician risk estimates were consistently found to be higher than the expected proportion of ACE from the sampled population.

CONCLUSION

Physicians systematically overestimate ACE risk. A range of factors are associated with physician risk estimates. These include factors strongly predictive of ACE, such as age and ECG characteristics. They also include other factors that have been shown to be unreliable predictors of ACE in an ED setting, such as typicality of pain and risk factors.

Recommendations for Institutions Transitioning to High-Sensitivity Troponin Testing: JACC Scientific Expert Panel

High-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) I or T methods have been in use in certain regions for years but are now increasingly globally adopted, including in the United States. Accordingly, inevitable challenges are created for institutions transitioning from conventional cardiac troponin (cTn) assays. hs-cTn assays have higher analytic precision at lower concentrations, yielding greater clinical sensitivity for myocardial injury and allowing accurate recognition of small changes in troponin concentration (rise or fall) within a short time frame. Although much of the knowledge regarding troponin biology that was applicable with older troponin assays still holds true, considerable education regarding the differences between conventional cTn and hs-cTn is needed before medical systems convert to the newer methods. This includes a basic understanding of how hs-cTn testing differs from conventional cTn testing and how it is best deployed in different settings, such as the emergency department and inpatient services. This Expert Panel will review important concepts for institutional transition to hs-cTn methodology, providing recommendations useful for education before implementation.

Prognostic Accuracy of the HEART Score for Prediction of Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Patients Presenting With Chest Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The HEART score has been proposed for emergency department (ED) prediction of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). We sought to summarize all studies assessing the prognostic accuracy of the HEART score for prediction of MACE in adult ED patients presenting with chest pain.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception through May 2018 and included studies using the HEART score for the prediction of short-term MACE in adult patients presenting to the ED with chest pain. The main outcome was short-term (i.e., 30-day or 6-week) incidence of MACE. We secondarily evaluated the prognostic accuracy of the HEART score for prediction of mortality and myocardial infarction (MI). Where available, accuracy of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score was determined.

RESULTS

We included 30 studies (n = 44,202) in analysis. A HEART score above the low-risk threshold (≥4) had a sensitivity of 95.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 93.3%-97.5%) and specificity of 44.6% (95% CI = 38.8%-50.5%) for MACE. A high-risk HEART score (≥7) had a sensitivity of 39.5% (95% CI = 31.6%-48.1%) and specificity of 95.0% (95% CI = 92.6%-96.6%) for MACE, whereas a TIMI score above the low-risk threshold (≥2) had a sensitivity of 87.8% (95% CI = 80.2%-92.8%) and specificity of 48.1% (95% CI = 38.9%-57.5%) for MACE. A high-risk TIMI score (≥6) was 2.8% sensitive (95% CI = 0.8%-9.6%), but 99.6% (95% CI = 98.5%-99.9%) specific for MACE. A HEART score ≥ 4 had a sensitivity of 95.0% (95% CI = 87.2%-98.2%) for prediction of mortality and 97.5% (95% CI = 93.7%-99.0%) for prediction of MI.

CONCLUSIONS

The HEART score has excellent performance for prediction of MACE (particularly mortality and MI) in chest pain patients and should be the primary clinical decision instrument used for the risk stratification of this patient population.

Artificial intelligence to predict needs for urgent revascularization from 12-leads electrocardiography in emergency patients

Background

Patient with acute coronary syndrome benefits from early revascularization. However, methods for the selection of patients who require urgent revascularization from a variety of patients visiting the emergency room with chest symptoms is not fully established. Electrocardiogram is an easy and rapid procedure, but may contain crucial information not recognized even by well-trained physicians.

Objective

To make a prediction model for the needs for urgent revascularization from 12-lead electrocardiogram recorded in the emergency room.

Method

We developed an artificial intelligence model enabling the detection of hidden information from a 12-lead electrocardiogram recorded in the emergency room. Electrocardiograms obtained from consecutive patients visiting the emergency room at Keio University Hospital from January 2012 to April 2018 with chest discomfort was collected. These data were splitted into validation and derivation dataset with no duplication in each dataset. The artificial intelligence model was constructed to select patients who require urgent revascularization within 48 hours. The model was trained with the derivation dataset and tested using the validation dataset.

Results

Of the consecutive 39,619 patients visiting the emergency room with chest discomfort, 362 underwent urgent revascularization. Of them, 249 were included in the derivation dataset and the remaining 113 were included in validation dataset. For the control, 300 were randomly selected as derivation dataset and another 130 patients were randomly selected for validation dataset from the 39,317 who did not undergo urgent revascularization. On validation, our artificial intelligence model had predictive value of the c-statistics 0.88 (95% CI 0.84–0.93) for detecting patients who required urgent revascularization.

Conclusions

Our artificial intelligence model provides information to select patients who need urgent revascularization from only 12-leads electrocardiogram in those visiting the emergency room with chest discomfort.

Prognostic Utility of the HEART Score in the Observation Unit

The evaluation of individuals with possible acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is time consuming and costly. Risk stratification early during an acute care encounter presents an opportunity for increased delivery of high-value care. We sought to evaluate if the HEART score could be used in the triage of low-risk versus high-risk patients directly home without cardiac testing. Retrospective review of 838 patients placed in an observation unit for evaluation of AMI was done at a single-center, tertiary care teaching hospital. Primary outcome was major adverse cardiac event-death, AMI, or revascularization-at 30 days from the index encounter. Participants' average age was 60.1 years, 40% were male, and 67% were African American. Complete data were available for all 838 patients, including 30-day follow-up at study completion. The primary endpoint was met in 14 patients (1.7%), all of whom were in the high-risk group, with HEART score ≥4. Of the low-risk patients, 8 (2.8%) had a positive functional study, 5 underwent subsequent coronary angiography, with none (0%) found to have obstructive coronary disease. In conclusion, our results suggest that patients with a HEART score ≤3 being evaluated for chest pain are at extremely low risk for major adverse cardiac events and may be safely discharged without provocative testing. Positive cardiac testing in this population is more likely to represent a false-positive finding, resulting in unnecessary testing. These findings should be prospectively validated.

HEART pathway and Emergency Department Assessment of Chest Pain Score–Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol application in a local emergency department of Hong Kong: An external prospective validation study

Background:

The conventional chest pain protocol using thrombolysis in myocardial infarction score as the risk stratifying tool may not perform well in the emergency department in which a mix of low- and high-risk patients are encountered. Newer chest pain scores such as HEART pathway and Emergency Department Assessment of Chest Pain Score–Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol (EDACS-ADP) are found to have high sensitivity with good specificity.

Objectives:

This study aims to validate and compare two chest pain scores: HEART pathway and EDACS-ADP in the Accident and Emergency Department of a local hospital in Hong Kong.

Methods:

A prospective cohort study was carried out at the Accident and Emergency Department of Kwong Wah Hospital in Hong Kong from 1 June 2016 to 31 May 2017. Patients ⩾18 years old with chest pain lasting 5 min or more who were observed with chest pain protocol on observation ward were recruited.

Results:

A total of 238 patients were recruited; 231 eligible patients completed follow-up. There were five patients with major adverse cardiac events in 30 days of follow-up. The sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive values of HEART pathway and EDACS-ADP were 100%, 74.3%, 100% and 100%, 73.5.0% and 100%, respectively. Both scores had almost the same performance in terms of major adverse cardiac events at 30 days (area under the curve = 0.87).

Conclusion:

Our study showed both EDACS-ADP (modified) and HEART pathway achieved high sensitivity (~100%) for detecting major adverse cardiac events in 30 days while being able to discharge more than 70% of patients as low risk for early discharge.

Received care compared to ADP-guided care of patients admitted to hospital with chest pain of possible cardiac origin

Purpose

To assess the extent to which accelerated diagnostic protocols (ADPs), compared to traditional care, identify patients presenting to emergency departments (EDs) with chest pain who are at low cardiac risk and eligible for early ED discharge.

Patients and methods

Retrospective study of 290 patients admitted to hospital for further evaluation of chest pain following negative ED workup (no acute ischemic electrocardiogram [ECG] changes or elevation of initial serum troponin assay). Demographic data, serial ECG and troponin results, Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score, cardiac investigations, and outcomes (confirmed acute coronary syndrome [ACS] at discharge and major adverse cardiac events [MACEs]) over 6 months of follow-up were analyzed. A validated ADP (ADAPT-ADP) was retrospectively applied to the cohort, and processes and outcomes of ADP-guided care were compared with those of care actually received.

Results

Patients had mean (±SD) TIMI score of 1.8 (±1.7); six (2.0%) patients were diagnosed with ACS at discharge. At 6 months, one patient (0.3%) re-presented with ACS and two (0.6%) died of non-coronary causes. The ADAPT-ADP defined 97 (33.4%) patients as being at low risk and eligible for early ED discharge, but who instead incurred mean hospital stay of 1.5 days, with 40.2% in telemetry beds, and 21.6% subject to non-invasive testing with only one positive result for coronary artery disease. None had a discharge diagnosis of ACS or developed MACE at 6 months.

Conclusion

Compared to traditional care, application of the ADAPT-ADP would have allowed one-third of chest pain patients with initially negative investigations in ED to have been safely discharged from ED.

A retrospective external validation study of the HEART score among patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain

Emergency physicians must be able to effectively prognosticate outcomes for patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) with chest pain. The HEART score offers a prognostication tool, but external validation studies are limited. We conducted an external retrospective validation study of the HEART score among ED patients presenting to our ED with chest pain from 1 January 2014 to 9 June 2014. We utilized chart review methodology to abstract data from each patient's electronic medical record. We collected data relevant to each of the five elements of the HEART score: history, electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation, patient age, patient risk factors, and troponin levels. We calculated the diagnostic accuracy of the HEART score (0-10) for predicting the primary outcome of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) over 6 weeks following the ED visit (coronary revascularization, myocardial infarction, or mortality). We randomly selected 10% of patient charts from which a second investigator abstracted all data to assess inter-rater reliability for all study variables. Of 625 charts reviewed, we abstracted data on 417 (66.7%) consecutive patients meeting study inclusion criteria. Thirty-one (7.4%) of these patients experienced 6-week MACE. We observed no instances of MACE within 6 weeks among subjects with a HEART score of 3 or less. The area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) is 0.885 (95% confidence interval 0.838-0.931). Patients with a HEART score ≤3 are at low risk for 6-week MACE. Hence, these patients may be candidates for outpatient follow-up instead of inpatient admission for cardiac risk stratification.

Acute coronary syndromes diagnosis, version 2.0: Tomorrow's approach to diagnosing acute coronary syndromes?

Chest pain accounts for approximately 6% of Emergency Department (ED) attendances and is the most common reason for emergency hospital admission. For many years, our approach to diagnosis has required patients to stay in hospital for at least 6–12 h to undergo serial biomarker testing. As less than one fifth of the patients undergoing investigation actually has an acute coronary syndrome (ACS), there is tremendous potential to reduce unnecessary hospital admissions.

Recent advances in diagnostic technology have improved the efficiency of care pathways. Decision aids such as the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) risk score and the History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk factors and Troponin (HEART) score enable rapid ‘rule out’ of ACS within hours of patients arriving in the ED. With high sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays, approximately one third of patients can have ACS ‘ruled out’ with a single blood test, and up to two thirds could have an acute myocardial infarction ‘ruled out’ with a second sample taken after as little as 1 h.

Building on those recent advances, this paper presents an overview of the principles behind the development of the Troponin-only Manchester Acute Coronary Syndromes (T-MACS) decision aid. This clinical prediction model could be used to ‘rule out’ and ‘rule in’ ACS following a single blood test and to calculate the probability of ACS for every patient. The future potential of this approach is then addressed, including practical applications of artificial intelligence, shared decision making, near-patient testing and personalized medicine.

Comparison of RISK-PCI, GRACE, TIMI risk scores for prediction of major adverse cardiac events in patients with acute coronary syndrome

AIM

To compare the prognostic performance of three major risk scoring systems including global registry for acute coronary events (GRACE), thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI), and prediction of 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (RISK-PCI).

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study involved 200 patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who underwent invasive diagnostic approach, ie, coronary angiography and myocardial revascularization if appropriate, in the period from January 2014 to July 2014. The GRACE, TIMI, and RISK-PCI risk scores were compared for their predictive ability. The primary endpoint was a composite 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), which included death, urgent target-vessel revascularization (TVR), stroke, and non-fatal recurrent myocardial infarction (REMI).

RESULTS

The c-statistics of the tested scores for 30-day MACE or area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with confidence intervals (CI) were as follows: RISK-PCI (AUC=0.94; 95% CI 1.790-4.353), the GRACE score on admission (AUC=0.73; 95% CI 1.013-1.045), the GRACE score on discharge (AUC=0.65; 95% CI 0.999-1.033). The RISK-PCI score was the only score that could predict TVR (AUC=0.91; 95% CI 1.392-2.882). The RISK-PCI scoring system showed an excellent discriminative potential for 30-day death (AUC=0.96; 95% CI 1.339-3.548) in comparison with the GRACE scores on admission (AUC=0.88; 95% CI 1.018-1.072) and on discharge (AUC=0.78; 95% CI 1.000-1.058).

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison with the GRACE and TIMI scores, RISK-PCI score showed a non-inferior ability to predict 30-day MACE and death in ACS patients. Moreover, RISK-PCI was the only scoring system that could predict recurrent ischemia requiring TVR.

Modification of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction risk score for patients presenting with chest pain to the emergency department

OBJECTIVE

To develop a modified Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score to effectively risk stratify patients presenting to the ED with chest pain.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted at two metropolitan EDs. Data were obtained during patient interview. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) within 30 days of presentation. Two separate modifications of the TIMI score were developed. These scores were compared to the original TIMI in terms of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and diagnostic accuracy statistics (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values).

RESULTS

Of 1760 patients, 364 (20.7%) experienced 30 day MACE. The first modified TIMI score was a simplified TIMI (s-TIMI) including four variables: age ≥65 years, three or more risk factors, high-sensitivity troponin (hs-cTnI) and electrocardiogram changes. The second score included the same four variables plus two Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) variables (systolic blood pressure and estimated glomerular filtration rate). This score was termed the GRACE TIMI (g-TIMI). s-TIMI had a lower sensitivity compared to the original TIMI score (93.41 and 96.98%), but higher specificity (45.49 and 24.50%). The g-TIMI had a sensitivity of 98.90% and specificity of 14.90%.

CONCLUSIONS

Attempts to modify the TIMI score yielded two scores with added predictive utility in comparison to the original TIMI model. The addition of GRACE variables (g-TIMI) increased sensitivity for MACE, but decreased the specificity of the model. The s-TIMI score yielded good specificity but had sensitivity that would not be acceptable by emergency physicians. The s-TIMI may be useful as part of an accelerated chest pain protocol.

Chest pain triage: Current trends in the emergency departments in the United States

Chest pain is one of the most common complaints in the emergency department (ED). Over the past decade, there has been a significant shift in the approach to patients with chest pain in the ED. With the development of improved cardiac biomarkers, the validation of clinical scoring systems, and an increasing emphasis on shared patient medical decision making, increasing numbers of patients in the ED are being evaluated without requiring admission to the hospital.

Novel Emergency Department Risk Score Discriminates Acute Coronary Syndrome Among Chest Pain Patients With Known Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with known coronary artery disease presenting to the emergency department (ED) with chest pain are often admitted, yet may not be having an acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

METHODS

We assessed whether the use of a novel risk score and a modified thrombolysis in myocardial infarction risk score obtained in the ED could discriminate which of these high-risk patients have ACS. Chart review was performed on a cohort of 285 patients with known coronary artery disease presenting to the ED with chest pain thought to be of ischemic origin and admitted to the hospital. The ED variables were assessed with logistic regression for their association with eventual ACS diagnosis at hospital discharge. ACS was diagnosed in 74 (26%) of the patients.

RESULTS

Non-ACS patients had a 2-day median length of stay and $6875 median inpatient (post ED) hospital charges (not including physician fees), totaling 566 hospital bed days and $1,871,250 for the 211 (74%) non-ACS patients. A novel risk score, including (1) history of prior revascularization, (2) comorbid chronic kidney disease, (3) onset of chest discomfort at rest, (4) dynamic electrocardiogram changes in the ED, (5) elevated troponin I (>0.05 ng/mL) in the ED, and (6) associated illness at presentation, discriminated ACS and non-ACS with a c statistic of 0.767; the c statistic for a modified thrombolysis in myocardial infarction risk score was 0.712.

CONCLUSIONS

Application of these risk scores may reduce the number of potentially avoidable admissions and their associated hazards and costs.

Low Adverse Event Rates But High Emergency Department Utilization in Chest Pain Patients Treated in an Emergency Department Observation Unit

OBJECTIVES

Nearly 40% of all previously admitted chest pain patients re-present to the emergency department (ED) within 1 year regardless of stress testing, and nearly 5% of patients return with a major adverse cardiac event (MACE). The primary objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of return visits to the ED among patients previously admitted to an ED chest pain observation unit (CPU). We also identified the patient characteristics and health risk factors associated with these return ED visits.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study of patients admitted to a CPU in a large-volume academic urban ED who were subsequently followed over a period of 1 year. Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years old, American Heart Association low-to-intermediate assessed risk, electrocardiogram nondiagnostic for acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and a negative initial troponin I. Excluded patients were those age >75 years with a history of coronary artery disease. Patients were followed throughout their observation unit stay and then subsequently for 1 year. On all repeat ED evaluations, standardized chart abstractions forms were used, charts were reviewed by 2 trained abstractors blinded to the study hypothesis, and a random sample of charts was examined for interrater reliability. Return visits were categorized as MACE, cardiac non-MACE, or noncardiac based on a priori criteria. Social security death index searches were performed on all patients. Univariate and multivariate ordinal logistic regressions were conducted to determine demographics, medical procedures, and comorbid conditions that predicted return visits to the ED.

RESULTS

A total of 2139 patients were enrolled over 17 months. The median age was 52 years, 55% were female. Forty-four patients (2.1%) had ACS on index visit. A total of 36.2% of CPU patients returned to the ED within 1 year vs. 5.4% of all ED patients (P < 0.01). However, the overall incidence of MACE at 1 year in all patients and in those without an index visit diagnosis of ACS was 0.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4%-06%) and 0.4% (95% CI, 0.2%-0.7%), respectively. Patients who received a stress test on index visit were less likely to return (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.64 [95% CI, 0.51-0.80]) but patients who smoked (AOR = 1.51 [95% CI, 1.16-1.96]) or had diabetes (AOR = 1.36 [95% CI, 1.07-1.87]) were more likely to return. Hispanic and African-American patients had increased odds of multiple return ED visits (AOR=1.23 [95% CI, 1.04-1.46] and AOR =1.74 [95% CI, 1.45-2.13], respectively).

CONCLUSION

Patients treated in an ED CPU have a very low rate of MACE at 1 year. However, these same patients have very high rates of subsequent ED utilization. The associations between certain comparative demographics and ED utilization suggest the need for further research to identify and address the needs of these patient populations that precipitate the higher than expected return rate.

National Heart Foundation of Australia and Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand: Australian clinical guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes 2016

INTRODUCTION

The modern care of suspected and confirmed acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is informed by an extensive and evolving evidence base. This clinical practice guideline focuses on key components of management associated with improved clinical outcomes for patients with chest pain or ACS. These are presented as recommendations that have been graded on both the strength of evidence and the likely absolute benefit versus harm. Additional considerations influencing the delivery of specific therapies and management strategies are presented as practice points.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS

This guideline provides advice on the standardised assessment and management of patients with suspected ACS, including the implementation of clinical assessment pathways and subsequent functional and anatomical testing. It provides guidance on the: diagnosis and risk stratification of ACS; provision of acute reperfusion therapy and immediate post-fibrinolysis care for patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction; risk stratification informing the use of routine versus selective invasive management for patients with non-ST segment elevation ACS; administration of antithrombotic therapies in the acute setting and considerations affecting their long term use; and implementation of an individualised secondary prevention plan that includes both pharmacotherapies and cardiac rehabilitation. Changes in management as a result of the guideline: This guideline has been designed to facilitate the systematic integration of the recommendations into a standardised approach to ACS care, while also allowing for contextual adaptation of the recommendations in response to the individual's needs and preferences. The provision of ACS care should be subject to continuous monitoring, feedback and improvement of quality and patient outcomes.

Screening Characteristics of TIMI Score in Predicting Acute Coronary Syndrome Outcome; a Diagnostic Accuracy Study

INTRODUCTION

In cases with potential diagnosis of ischemic chest pain, screening high risk patients for adverse outcomes would be very helpful. The present study was designed aiming to determine the diagnostic accuracy of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) score in Patients with potential diagnosis of ischemic chest pain.

METHOD

This diagnostic accuracy study was designed to evaluate the screening performance characteristics of TIMI score in predicting 30-day outcomes of mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and need for revascularization in patients presenting to ED with complaint of typical chest pain and diagnosis of unstable angina or Non-ST elevation MI.

RESULTS

901 patients with the mean age of 58.17 ± 15.00 years (19-90) were studied (52.9% male). Mean TIMI score of the studied patients was 0.97 ± 0.93 (0-5) and the highest frequency of the score belonged to 0 to 2 with 37.2%, 35.3%, and 21.4%, respectively. In total, 170 (18.8%) patients experienced the outcomes evaluated in this study. Total sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and positive and negative likelihood ratio of TIMI score were 20 (95% CI: 17 - 24), 99 (95% CI: 97 - 100), 98 (95% CI: 93 - 100), 42 (95% CI: 39 - 46), 58 (95% CI: 14 - 229), and 1.3 (95% CI: 1.2 - 1.4), respectively. Area under the ROC curve of this system for prediction of 30-day mortality, MI, and need for revascularization were 0.51 (95% CI: 0.47 - 0.55), 0.58 (95% CI: 0.54 - 0.62) and 0.56 (95% CI: 0.52 - 0.60), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings of the present study, it seems that TIMI score has a high specificity in predicting 30-day adverse outcomes of mortality, MI, and need for revascularization following acute coronary syndrome. However, since its sensitivity, negative predictive value, and negative likelihood ratio are low, it cannot be used as a proper screening tool for ruling out low risk patients in ED.

Early Rule-Out and Rule-In Strategies for Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

Patients with chest pain comprise a large proportion of emergency presentations and place a major burden on healthcare resources. Therefore, efforts to safely and rapidly identify those with and without acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are needed. The challenge for clinicians is to accurately identify patients with acute coronary syndromes, while balancing the need to safely and rapidly reassure and discharge those without serious conditions.

CONTENT

This review summarizes the evidence to date on optimum accelerated strategies for the rule-in and rule-out of AMI, using strategies focused on optimum use of troponin results. Evidence based on both sensitive and highly sensitive troponin assay results is presented. The use of novel biomarkers is also addressed and the combination of biomarkers with other clinical information in accelerated diagnostic strategies is discussed.

SUMMARY

The majority of patients, who are not at risk of myocardial infarction or other serious harm, may be suitable for discharge directly from the emergency setting using approaches focused on troponin algorithms and accelerated diagnostic protocols. Evidence about the clinical and health economic impact of use of such strategies is needed, as they may have major benefits for both patients and healthcare providers.

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

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

Clinical Evaluation Versus Undetectable High-Sensitivity Troponin for Assessment of Patients With Acute Chest Pain

Decision-making in acute chest pain remains challenging despite normal (below ninety-ninth percentile) high-sensitivity troponin (hs-cTn). Some studies suggest that undetectable hs-cTn, far below the ninety-ninth percentile, might rule out acute coronary syndrome. We investigated clinical data in comparison to undetectable hs-cTnT. The study comprised 682 patients (November 2010 to September 2011) presenting at the emergency department with chest pain and normal hs-cTnT (<14 ng/l). The main end point was major adverse cardiac events (MACE: death, myocardial infarction, readmission for unstable angina, or revascularization) at a 4-year median follow-up; secondary end point was 30-day MACE. A clinical score was built by assigning points according to hazard ratios of the independent predictive variables: 1 point (male and effort-related pain) and 2 points (recurrent pain and prior ischemic heart disease). The negative predictive values of the clinical score and undetectable hs-cTnT (<5 ng/l), were tested. A total of 72 (10.6%) patients suffered long-term MACE. The C-statistics of the clinical score for long-term (0.75) and 30-day (0.88) MACE were higher than with the TIMI(Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) risk (0.68, 0.77) or GRACE(Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) (0.50, 0.47) scores. Likewise, the negative predictive values of score = 0 (97.5%, 100%) and ≤1 point (95.9%, 100%) were higher than using undetectable hs-cTnT (91.9%, 98.1%). Both clinical scores of 0 and ≤1 better classified patients at risk of MACE (p = 0.0001, log-rank test) than hs-cTnT <5 ng/l (p = 0.06). In conclusion, clinical data can guide decision-making and perform at least equally well as undetectable hs-cTnT, in patients presenting at the emergency department with chest pain and normal hs-cTnT.

Best Clinical Practice: Current Controversies in the Evaluation of Low-Risk Chest Pain with Risk Stratification Aids. Part 2

BACKGROUND

Chest pain accounts for 10% of emergency department (ED) visits annually, and many of these patients are admitted because of potentially life-threatening conditions. A substantial percentage of patients with chest pain are at low risk for a major cardiac adverse event (MACE).

OBJECTIVE

We investigated controversies in the evaluation of patients with low-risk chest pain, including clinical scores, decision pathways, and shared decision-making.

DISCUSSION

ED patients with chest pain who have negative biomarker results and nonischemic electrocardiograms are at low risk for MACE. With the large number of chest pain patients evaluated in the ED, several risk scores and pathways are in use based on history, electrocardiographic results, and biomarker results. The Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction and Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events scores are older rules with validation; however, they do not have adequate sensitivity or are not easy to use in the ED. The Vancouver chest pain and North American chest pain rules may be used for patients with undifferentiated chest pain in the ED. The Manchester Acute Coronary Syndromes rule uses eight factors, several of which are not available in the United States. The history, electrocardiography, age, risk factors, and troponin (HEART) score and pathway are easy to use, have high sensitivity and negative predictive values, and have better discriminatory capability for categorization. The use of pathways with shared decision-making involves the patient in management, shortens the duration of stay, and decreases risk to both the patient and the provider.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk stratification of ED patients with chest pain has evolved, and there are many tools available. The HEART pathway, designed for ED use, has several attributes that provide safe and efficient care for patients with chest pain.

Triple rule-out computed tomography for risk stratification of patients with acute chest pain

AIMS

Clinical evidence supporting triple rule-out computed tomography (TRO-CT) for rapid screening of cardiovascular disease is limited. We investigated the clinical value of TRO-CT in patients with acute chest pain.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 1024 patients who visited the emergency department (ED) with acute chest pain and underwent TRO-CT using a 128-slice CT system. TRO-CT was classified as "positive" if it revealed clinically significant cardiovascular disease including obstructive coronary artery disease, pulmonary thromboembolism, or acute aortic syndrome. The clinical endpoint was occurrence of a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) within 30 days, defined by a composite of all cause death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, major cardiovascular surgery, or thrombolytic therapy. Clinical risk scores for acute chest pain including TIMI, GRACE, Diamond-Forrester, and HEART were determined and compared to the TRO-CT findings.

RESULTS

TRO-CT revealed clinically significant cardiovascular disease in 239 patients (23.3%). MACE occurred in 119 patients (49.8%) with positive TRO-CT and in 7 patients (0.9%) with negative TRO-CT (p < 0.001). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of TRO-CT was 95%, 88%, 54%, and 99%, respectively. TRO-CT was a better discriminator between patients with vs. without events as compared to clinical risk scores (c-statistics = 0.91 versus 0.64 to 0.71; integrated discrimination improvement = 0.31 to 0.37; p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Patients with a negative TRO-CT showed shorter ED stay times and admission rates compared to patients with positive TRO-CT, irrespective of clinical risk scores (p < 0.001 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSION

Triple rule-out CT has high predictive performance for 30-day MACE and permits rapid triage and low admission rates irrespective of clinical risk scores.