Literature DB >> 22127744

Adenosine stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance-observation unit management of patients at intermediate risk for acute coronary syndrome: a possible strategy for reducing healthcare-related costs.

Michael E Hall1, Chadwick D Miller, W Gregory Hundley.   

Abstract

OPINION STATEMENT: Although clear algorithms for diagnosis and treatment of patients with chest pain at low or high risk for an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) exist, they are less well delineated for patients presenting with chest pain with an intermediate risk for ACS. In patients presenting acutely or subacutely to emergency departments (EDs) at high risk for ACS, such as those with ST segment elevation on their 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG), immediate contrast coronary angiography is performed. On the other hand, chest pain observation units (OUs) are recommended for managing those with chest pain at low risk for an ACS event. In this setting, these OUs are associated with lower healthcare resource utilization and improved cost-effectiveness. Cost-effective diagnosis and treatment options are important goals in healthcare delivery systems. The presentation of patients at intermediate risk for ACS represents an emerging source of resource utilization for EDs. These patients often exhibit pre-existing coronary artery disease, may have sustained prior myocardial infarction, and exhibit multiple comorbidities such as diabetes and hypercholesterolemia. Importantly, however, they will not have evidence of ST elevation on their 12-lead ECG nor will they exhibit serum markers (troponin or creatinine kinase elevations) indicative of ACS. As a consequence of existing co-morbidities, their management becomes time-consuming and may require inpatient monitoring, observation, and cardiac stress testing. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is a powerful tool for risk stratification and prognosis determination in patients in need of stress testing at intermediate risk of ACS. For those who present with acute chest pain syndromes, the combination of CMR in an OU setting represents a potentially attractive option for reducing healthcare-related expenditures without compromising patient outcomes. Recent study results from single centers suggest that CMR-OU care may result in fewer unnecessary hospital admissions and invasive procedures in those presenting with intermediate risk ACS. Further research utilizing stress CMR testing from multiple centers in OU settings is needed to determine if this model of care improves efficiency, reduces healthcare costs, and delivers optimum care in individuals presenting to EDs with chest pain at intermediate risk of ACS.

Entities:  

Year:  2012        PMID: 22127744      PMCID: PMC3815593          DOI: 10.1007/s11936-011-0156-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med        ISSN: 1092-8464


  27 in total

1.  Negative predictive value of normal adenosine-stress cardiac MRI in the assessment of coronary artery disease and correlation with semiquantitative perfusion analysis.

Authors:  Guenter Pilz; Susanne Eierle; Tobias Heer; Markus Klos; Eman Ali; Roland Scheck; Michael Wild; Peter Bernhardt; Berthold Hoefling
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 2.  ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents.

Authors:  W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 24.094

3.  ACC/AHA 2007 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction): developed in collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons: endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

Authors:  Jeffrey L Anderson; Cynthia D Adams; Elliott M Antman; Charles R Bridges; Robert M Califf; Donald E Casey; William E Chavey; Francis M Fesmire; Judith S Hochman; Thomas N Levin; A Michael Lincoff; Eric D Peterson; Pierre Theroux; Nanette Kass Wenger; R Scott Wright; Sidney C Smith; Alice K Jacobs; Jonathan L Halperin; Sharon A Hunt; Harlan M Krumholz; Frederick G Kushner; Bruce W Lytle; Rick Nishimura; Joseph P Ornato; Richard L Page; Barbara Riegel
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2007-08-06       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 4.  Utilization management of cardiovascular imaging pre-certification and appropriateness.

Authors:  Robert C Hendel
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2008-03

5.  The efficacy of diagnostic imaging.

Authors:  D G Fryback; J R Thornbury
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1991 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 6.  MRI safety update 2008: part 2, screening patients for MRI.

Authors:  Frank G Shellock; Alberto Spinazzi
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  A clinical trial of a chest-pain observation unit for patients with unstable angina. Chest Pain Evaluation in the Emergency Room (CHEER) Investigators.

Authors:  M E Farkouh; P A Smars; G S Reeder; A R Zinsmeister; R W Evans; T D Meloy; S L Kopecky; M Allen; T G Allison; R J Gibbons; S E Gabriel
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1998-12-24       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Utility of fast cine magnetic resonance imaging and display for the detection of myocardial ischemia in patients not well suited for second harmonic stress echocardiography.

Authors:  W G Hundley; C A Hamilton; M S Thomas; D M Herrington; T B Salido; D W Kitzman; W C Little; K M Link
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1999-10-19       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 9.  ACR Appropriateness Criteria® on chest pain, suggestive of acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  Leena Mammen; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard; J Jeffrey Carr; James P Earls; Robert C Hendel; Vincent B Ho; Udo Hoffman; Thomas Ryan; U Joseph Schoepf; Charles S White
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 5.532

10.  Prognostic value of cardiac magnetic resonance stress tests: adenosine stress perfusion and dobutamine stress wall motion imaging.

Authors:  Cosima Jahnke; Eike Nagel; Rolf Gebker; Thomas Kokocinski; Sebastian Kelle; Robert Manka; Eckart Fleck; Ingo Paetsch
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2007-03-12       Impact factor: 29.690

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Emergency department observation units and the older patient.

Authors:  Mark G Moseley; Miles P Hawley; Jeffrey M Caterino
Journal:  Clin Geriatr Med       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 3.076

Review 2.  Cardiac magnetic resonance and computed tomography angiography for clinical imaging of stable coronary artery disease. Diagnostic classification and risk stratification.

Authors:  Grigorios Korosoglou; Sorin Giusca; Gitsios Gitsioudis; Christian Erbel; Hugo A Katus
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2014-08-06       Impact factor: 4.566

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.