Browsing by Subject "Chest Pain"

Now showing 1 - 10 of 10
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Acute Coronary Syndrome: Diagnosis and Initial Management.
    (American family physician, 2024-01) Nohria, Raman; Viera, Anthony J
    Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is defined as reduced blood flow to the coronary myocardium manifesting as ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or non-ST-segment elevation ACS, which includes unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Common risk factors include being at least 65 years of age or a current smoker or having hypertension, diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, a body mass index greater than 25 kg per m2, or a family history of premature coronary artery disease. Symptoms most predictive of ACS include chest discomfort that is substernal or spreading to the arms or jaw. However, chest pain that can be reproduced with palpation or varies with breathing or position is less likely to signify ACS. Having a prior abnormal cardiac stress test result indicates increased risk. Electrocardiography changes that predict ACS include ST depression, ST elevation, T-wave inversion, or presence of Q waves. No validated clinical decision tool is available to rule out ACS in the outpatient setting. Elevated troponin levels without ST-segment elevation on electrocardiography suggest non-ST-segment elevation ACS. Patients with ACS should receive coronary angiography with percutaneous or surgical revascularization. Other important management considerations include initiation of dual antiplatelet therapy and parenteral anticoagulation, statin therapy, beta-blocker therapy, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor therapy. Additional interventions shown to reduce mortality in patients who have had a recent myocardial infarction include smoking cessation, annual influenza vaccination, and cardiac rehabilitation.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    ItemOpen Access
    Care of the Patient with Chest Pain in the Observation Unit.
    (Emergency medicine clinics of North America, 2017-08) Borawski, Joseph B; Graff, Louis G; Limkakeng, Alexander T
    Care of the patient presenting to an emergency department (ED) with chest pain remains a common yet challenging aspect of emergency medicine. Acute coronary syndrome presents in nonspecific fashion. The development and evolution of the ED-based observation unit has helped to safely assess and diagnose those most at risk for an adverse cardiac event. Furthermore, there are several provocative testing modalities to help assess for coronary artery disease. This article serves to describe and discuss the modern ED-based observation unit approach to patients with chest pain and/or angina equivalents presenting to an ED.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Differences between chest pain observation service patients and admitted "rule-out myocardial infarction" patients.
    (Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 1997-07) Dallara, J; Severance, HW; Davis, B; Schulz, G

    Objective

    To compare and contrast the patient characteristics of ED patients at low risk for acute cardiac ischemia who were assigned to a chest pain observation service vs those admitted to a monitored inpatient bed for "rule-out acute myocardial infarction" (R/O MI).

    Methods

    This was a retrospective, cross-sectional comparison of adult patients considered at relatively low risk for cardiac ischemia and who were evaluated in 1 of 2 settings: a short-term observation service and an inpatient monitored bed. All patients had an ED final diagnosis of "chest pain," "R/O MI," or "unstable angina" during the 7-month study period. Demographic features and presenting clinical features were examined as a function of site of patient evaluation.

    Results

    Of 531 study patients, 265 (50%) were assigned to the observation service. Younger age (OR = 1.75, 95% CI 1.26, 2.44, for each decrement of 20 years), the complaint of "chest pain" (OR = 2.35, 95% CI 1.34, 4.12), and the absence of prior known coronary artery disease (OR = 1.64, 95% CI 1.13, 2.38) were the principal independent factors associated with assignment to a chest pain observation service bed.

    Conclusions

    Patients evaluated in a chest pain observation service appear to have different clinical characteristics than other individuals admitted to a monitored inpatient bed for "R/O MI." Investigators should address differences in clinical characteristics when making outcome comparisons between these 2 patient groups.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Economic Outcomes With Anatomical Versus Functional Diagnostic Testing for Coronary Artery Disease.
    (Annals of internal medicine, 2016-07) Mark, Daniel B; Federspiel, Jerome J; Cowper, Patricia A; Anstrom, Kevin J; Hoffmann, Udo; Patel, Manesh R; Davidson-Ray, Linda; Daniels, Melanie R; Cooper, Lawton S; Knight, J David; Lee, Kerry L; Douglas, Pamela S; PROMISE Investigators

    Background

    PROMISE (PROspective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain) found that initial use of at least 64-slice multidetector computed tomography angiography (CTA) versus functional diagnostic testing strategies did not improve clinical outcomes in stable symptomatic patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) requiring noninvasive testing.

    Objective

    To conduct an economic analysis for PROMISE (a major secondary aim of the study).

    Design

    Prospective economic study from the U.S. perspective. Comparisons were made according to the intention-to-treat principle, and CIs were calculated using bootstrap methods. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01174550).

    Setting

    190 U.S. centers.

    Patients

    9649 U.S. patients enrolled in PROMISE between July 2010 and September 2013. Median follow-up was 25 months.

    Measurements

    Technical costs of the initial (outpatient) testing strategy were estimated from Premier Research Database data. Hospital-based costs were estimated using hospital bills and Medicare cost-charge ratios. Physician fees were taken from the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule. Costs were expressed in 2014 U.S. dollars, discounted at 3% annually, and estimated out to 3 years using inverse probability weighting methods.

    Results

    The mean initial testing costs were $174 for exercise electrocardiography; $404 for CTA; $501 to $514 for pharmacologic and exercise stress echocardiography, respectively; and $946 to $1132 for exercise and pharmacologic stress nuclear testing, respectively. Mean costs at 90 days were $2494 for the CTA strategy versus $2240 for the functional strategy (mean difference, $254 [95% CI, -$634 to $906]). The difference was associated with more revascularizations and catheterizations (4.25 per 100 patients) with CTA use. After 90 days, the mean cost difference between the groups out to 3 years remained small.

    Limitation

    Cost weights for test strategies were obtained from sources outside PROMISE.

    Conclusion

    Computed tomography angiography and functional diagnostic testing strategies in patients with suspected CAD have similar costs through 3 years of follow-up.

    Primary funding source

    National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    ItemOpen Access
    Emergency physician high pretest probability for acute coronary syndrome correlates with adverse cardiovascular outcomes.
    (Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 2009-08) Chandra, Abhinav; Lindsell, Christopher J; Limkakeng, Alexander; Diercks, Deborah B; Hoekstra, James W; Hollander, Judd E; Kirk, J Douglas; Peacock, W Frank; Gibler, W Brian; Pollack, Charles V; EMCREG i*trACS Investigators
    OBJECTIVES: The value of unstructured physician estimate of risk for disease processes, other than acute coronary syndrome (ACS), has been demonstrated. The authors sought to evaluate the predictive value of unstructured physician estimate of risk for ACS in emergency department (ED) patients without obvious initial evidence of a cardiac event. METHODS: This was a post hoc secondary analysis of the Internet Tracking Registry for Acute Coronary Syndromes (i*trACS), a prospectively collected multicenter data registry of patients over the age of 18 years presenting to the ED with symptoms of ACS between 1999 and 2001. In this registry, following patient history, physical exam, and electrocardiogram (ECG), the unstructured treating physician estimate of risk was recorded. A 30-day follow-up and a medical record review were used to determine rates of adverse cardiac events, death, myocardial infarction (MI), or revascularization procedure. The analysis included all patients with nondiagnostic ECG changes, normal initial biomarkers, and a non-MI initial impression from the registry and excluded those without complete data or who were lost to follow-up. Data were stratified by unstructured physician risk estimate: noncardiac, low risk, high risk, or unstable angina. RESULTS: Of 15,608 unique patients in the registry, 10,145 met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Patients were defined as having unstable angina in 6.0% of cases; high risk, 23.5% of cases; low risk, 44.2%; and noncardiac, 26.3% of cases. Adverse cardiac event rates had an inverse relationship, decreasing from 22.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 18.8% to 25.6%) for unstable angina, 10.2% (95% CI = 9.0% to 11.5%) for those stratified as high risk, 2.2% (95% CI = 1.8% to 2.6%) for low risk, and to 1.8% (95% CI = 1.4% to 2.4%) for noncardiac. The relative risk (RR) of an adverse cardiac event for those with an initial label of unstable angina compared to those with a low-risk designation was 10.2 (95% CI = 8.0 to 13.0). The RR of an event for those with a high-risk initial impression compared to those with a low-risk initial impression was 4.7 (95% CI = 3.8 to 5.9). The risk of an event among those with a low-risk initial impression was the same as for those with a noncardiac initial impression (RR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.6 to 1.2). CONCLUSIONS: In ED patients without obvious initial evidence of a cardiac event, unstructured emergency physician (EP) estimate of risk correlates with adverse cardiac outcomes.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Identification of chest pain patients appropriate for an emergency department observation unit.
    (Emergency medicine clinics of North America, 2001-02) Wilkinson, K; Severance, H
    There are no perfect tests or algorithms to exclude ACI. Because acute coronary occlusion often occurs in patients with low-grade coronary stenosis, the diagnostic goal of a chest pain diagnostic protocol is not to identify patients with CAD, but rather to identify patients who may be safely discharged home without the development of complications such as MI, unstable angina, death, shock, or CHF over the next 1 to 6 months. There is an advantage to evaluating patients at the time of their symptoms. Patients who have a small plaque that is ruptured, leading to intracoronary thrombosis and ischemia, will manifest ischemia on diagnostic testing that could missed in routine outpatient testing when their plaque were stable. The diagnosis and risk stratification of acute coronary ischemia in the ED depends on a careful history and interpretation of the ECG. Multiple regression models using readily available data (e.g., history, physical examination, and ECG) provide the best tools for risk stratification. If one is deciding how to select patients for an EDOU chest pain evaluation, diagnostic tools that have previously been tested and validated in this setting are preferable. These include the Multicenter Chest Pain Study derived tools (i.e., Goldman, Lee), the ACI and ACI-TIPI tools, and sestamibi risk stratification tools. This is not to say that other tools may not play a role at individual institutions. It is probably better to select a consistent approach and evaluate its performance, rather than to allow random variation to dictate practice. The future direction probably will involve standardization of the ED chest pain population. This allows outcome and cost-effectiveness comparative research of various strategies for patients with normal or nondiagnostic ECGs and normal biomarkers. Although this approach allows more precise stratification, the risk will never be zero, meaning that there will never be a substitute for good clinical judgment and close follow-up care.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Rapidly progressing mycotic aortic aneurysm masquerading as acute coronary syndrome.
    (The Canadian journal of cardiology, 2013-12) Chhabra, Lovely; Kruger, Mihaela A; Kuraganti, Gayatri; Eltibi, Rami; Mamidala, Suresh; Bajaj, Rishi; Belur, Akhila; Rapose, Alwyn; Hannan, Joseph
    Mycotic aortic aneurysms are rare. The most common cause of a mycotic aortic aneurysm is bacterial seeding in a diseased or injured aortic intima with subsequent arteritis. Because the clinical presentation of mycotic aortic aneurysms can be quite variable, the diagnosis hence can often be quite challenging. We herewith report an interesting case study in which the patient with a mycotic aortic aneurysm presented with the clinical picture masquerading as an acute coronary syndrome. The scenario reiterates the fact that despite the availability of accurate noninvasive imaging techniques, strong clinical suspicion might be imperative for the diagnosis of mycotic aneurysms.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Simplified Predictive Instrument to Rule Out Acute Coronary Syndromes in a High-Risk Population.
    (J Am Heart Assoc, 2015-12-14) Fanaroff, Alexander C; Schulteis, Ryan D; Pieper, Karen S; Rao, Sunil V; Newby, L Kristin
    BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether diagnostic protocols based on cardiac markers to identify low-risk chest pain patients suitable for early release from the emergency department can be applied to patients older than 65 years or with traditional cardiac risk factors. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a single-center retrospective study of 231 consecutive patients with high-risk factor burden in which a first cardiac troponin (cTn) level was measured in the emergency department and a second cTn sample was drawn 4 to 14 hours later, we compared the performance of a modified 2-Hour Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol to Assess Patients with Chest Pain Using Contemporary Troponins as the Only Biomarker (ADAPT) rule to a new risk classification scheme that identifies patients as low risk if they have no known coronary artery disease, a nonischemic electrocardiogram, and 2 cTn levels below the assay's limit of detection. Demographic and outcome data were abstracted through chart review. The median age of our population was 64 years, and 75% had Thrombosis In Myocardial Infarction risk score ≥2. Using our risk classification rule, 53 (23%) patients were low risk with a negative predictive value for 30-day cardiac events of 98%. Applying a modified ADAPT rule to our cohort, 18 (8%) patients were identified as low risk with a negative predictive value of 100%. In a sensitivity analysis, the negative predictive value of our risk algorithm did not change when we relied only on undetectable baseline cTn and eliminated the second cTn assessment. CONCLUSIONS: If confirmed in prospective studies, this less-restrictive risk classification strategy could be used to safely identify chest pain patients with more traditional cardiac risk factors for early emergency department release.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Triaging Primary Care Patients Referred for Chest Pain to Specialist Cardiology Centres: Efficacy of an Optimised Protocol.
    (Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore, 2018-02) Tan, Francine Cl; Yap, Jonathan; Allen, John C; Tan, Olivia; Tan, Swee Yaw; Matchar, David B; Chua, Terrance Sj
    INTRODUCTION:Patients referred for chest pain from primary care have increased, along with demand for outpatient cardiology consultations. We evaluated 'Triage Protocol' that implements standardised diagnostic testing prior to patients' first cardiology consultation. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Under the 'Triage Protocol', patients referred for chest pain were pretriaged using a standardised algorithm and subsequently referred for relevant functional diagnostic cardiology tests before their initial cardiology consultation. At the initial cardiology consultation scheduled by the primary care provider, test results were reviewed. A total of 522 triage patients (mean age 55 ± 13, male 53%) were frequency-matched by age, gender and risk cohort to 289 control patients (mean age: 56 ± 11, male: 52%). Pretest risk of coronary artery disease was defined according to a Modified Duke Clinical Score (MDCS) as low (<10), intermediate (10-20) and high (>20). The primary outcome was time from referral to diagnosis (days). Secondary outcomes were total visits, discharge rate at first consultation, patient cost and adverse cardiac outcomes. RESULTS:The 'Triage Protocol' resulted in shorter times from referral to diagnosis (46 vs 131 days; P <0.0001) and fewer total visits (2.4 vs 3.0; P <0.0001). However, triage patients in low-risk groups experienced higher costs due to increased testing (S$421 vs S$357, P = 0.003). Adverse cardiac event rates under the 'Triage Protocol' indicated no compromise to patient safety (triage vs control: 0.57% vs 0.35%; P = 1.000). CONCLUSION:By implementing diagnostic cardiac testing prior to patients' first specialist consultation, the 'Triage Protocol' expedited diagnosis and reduced subsequent visits across all risk groups in ambulatory chest pain patients.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Utility of observation units for young emergency department chest pain patients.
    (Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2013-02) Ely, Sora; Chandra, Abhinav; Mani, Giselle; Drake, Weiying; Freeman, Debbie; Limkakeng, Alexander T
    BACKGROUND: Determining which patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) require further work-up for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) can be difficult. The utility of routine observation for cardiac testing in low-risk young adult patients has been questioned. STUDY OBJECTIVES: We investigated the rate of positive findings yielded by routine cardiac observation unit work-up in patients aged 40 years or younger. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational cohort study of patients aged 18-40 years who were evaluated for ACS in an ED-based observation unit. Data were collected by trained abstractors from electronic medical records. RESULTS: A total of 362 patients met inclusion criteria. Of those, 239 received stress testing, yielding five positive and nine indeterminate results. One other patient had acute troponin elevation while under observation. The positive stress test patients and troponin-elevated patient underwent cardiac angiography. Only one positive stress test patient showed significant coronary stenosis and received coronary interventions. In follow-up data, one patient had an adverse cardiac outcome within 1 year of index visit, but no coronary interventions. Thus, only 3 patients had adverse cardiac events, with only one patient warranting intervention discovered by observation unit stress testing and a second via serial cardiac markers. CONCLUSION: Routine observation of symptomatic young adults for ACS had low yield. Observation identified one patient with acute cardiac marker elevation and further stress testing identified only one patient with intervenable ACS, despite a high false-positive rate. This suggests that observation and stress testing should not be routinely performed in this demographic absent other high-risk features.