Diagnostic Impact of Hs-CRP and IL-6 for Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients Admitted to the ED with Chest Pain: Added Value to the HEART Score?

Objective

To investigate whether hs-CRP and IL-6 provide additional diagnostic value beyond that achieved by the HEART score in patients with chest pain suggestive of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) admitted to the emergency department (ED).

Methods

This was a post hoc analysis using data from the RACING-MI study. Baseline data, including hs-CRP and IL-6 levels, were analyzed using the plasma from the biobank. A total of 818 patients with chest pain suggestive of ACS were included in this analysis. Of these, 98 were diagnosed with ACS (12%). Logistic regression was used to identify the independent predictors of ACS development in patients with chest pain.

Results

hs-CRP levels >2 mg/L were observed in 50% of all ACS cases. IL-6 levels >1.3 pg/mL were observed in 71% of all ACS cases. hs-CRP had a sensitivity of 50% and specificity of 51% for the diagnosis of ACS, whereas IL-6 had a sensitivity of 71% and specificity of 29%. The diagnostic likelihood ratios for ACS was 1.0 for hs-CRP>2 mg/L and IL-6 > 1.3 pg/mL, respectively. Logistic regression analysis revealed that age, male gender, and ongoing smoking were associated with ACS in patients with acute chest pain. No association was found between IL-6 or hs-CRP level and ACS. This was observed for both IL-6 and hs-CRP, whether assessed on a continuous scale or using prespecified cut-off values.

Conclusion

Among the 818 patients admitted to the ED with chest pain suggestive of ACS, neither hs-CRP nor IL-6 provided an independent added diagnostic value. Our results suggest that inflammatory markers have limited diagnostic value in detecting patients with ACS in the ED.

Consequences of different cut-off values for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin for risk stratification of patients suspected for NSTE-ACS with a modified HEART score

Aim: This study aims to enhance prehospital risk assessment for suspected non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients using the HEART-score. By incorporating novel point-of-care high-sensitivity cardiac troponin devices, a modified HEART-score was developed and compared with the conventional approach. Patients & methods: Troponin points within the modified HEART-score are based on values below the limit of quantitation (LoQ), between the LoQ and 99th percentile and above the 99th percentile of the used device. A total HEART-score of three or lower is considered low-risk for major adverse cardiac events. Results & conclusion: The number of low-risk patients decreased based on the modified HEART-score. The sensitivity and negative predictive value increased which suggests increasing safety in ruling out patients with suspected NSTE-ACS.

Early risk assessment in patients with suspected NSTE-ACS; a retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Chest pain is among the most common reasons for Emergency Department (ED) presentation, while most patients should be considered low risk for Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). Management of these patients places a significant burden on our health care system. Various risk scores have been developed to facilitate the triage of patients with chest pain. However, it remains unclear which score performs best in identifying low risk patients, in various settings. The aim of this study was to determine which risk score performs best in ruling out non-ST elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS).

METHODS

Data was collected from all patients >18 years presenting to the ED between 01 and 01-2019 and 01-07-2019, if they were suspected of NSTE-ACS. Primary endpoint was NSTE-ACS during presentation to the ED or hospitalization, according to the 2020 ESC guidelines. In a secondary analysis we determined the number low-risk patients, at set safety levels of 95% and 98%.

RESULTS

A total of 536 patients were included, 192 (35.9%) were admitted to the hospital and NSTE-ACS occurred in 134 of 536 patients (25.0%). When areas under the curve (AUC) were compared, pre-HEART (0.869; CI 0.835-0.903), T-MACS (0.862; CI 0.825-0.898) and HEART (0.850; CI 0.815-0.885) performed best. At a safety level of 98%, the HEART score was the best performing risk score and identified 28.9% of patients as low risk, and missed 0 cases of NSTE-ACS. Followed by the pre-HEART score, which identified 18.3% of all patients as low risk, and missed 0% of NSTE-ACS.

CONCLUSIONS

The newly developed pre-HEART score is both practical and has accurate diagnostic properties, closely followed by the HEART score, and T-MACS. New pre-hospital risk scores are promising and much needed. Future studies should focus on the usage of pre-hospital scores for triage of patients with chest pain, in order to reduce the burden on emergency health care.