Literature DB >> 8998090

Comprehensive strategy for the evaluation and triage of the chest pain patient.

J L Tatum1, R L Jesse, M C Kontos, C S Nicholson, K L Schmidt, C S Roberts, J P Ornato.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a systematic evaluation and triage strategy including immediate resting myocardial perfusion imaging in patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain of possible ischemic origin.
METHODS: We conducted an observational study of 1,187 consecutive patients seen in the ED of an urban tertiary care hospital with the chief complaint of chest pain. Within 60 minutes of presentation, each patient was assigned to one of five levels on the basis of his or her risk of myocardial infarction (MI) or unstable angina (UA): level 1, MI; level 2, MI/UA; level 3, probable UA; level 4, possible UA; and level 5, noncardiac chest pain. In the lower risk levels (3 and 4), immediate resting myocardial perfusion imaging was used as a risk-stratification tool alone (level 4) or in combination with serial markers (level 3).
RESULTS: Acute MI, early revascularization indicative of acute coronary syndrome, or both were consistent with risk designations: level 1: 96% MI, 56% revascularization; level 2: 13% MI, 29% revascularization; level 3: 3% MI, 17% revascularization; level 4: .7% MI; 2.5% revascularization. Sensitivity of immediate resting myocardial perfusion imaging for MI was 100% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64% to 100%) and specificity 78% (74% to 82%). In patients with abnormal imaging findings, risk for MI (7% versus 0%, P < .001; relative risk [RR], 50; 95% CI, 2.8 to 889) and for MI or revascularization (32% vs 2%, P < .001; RR, 15.5; 95% CI, 6.4 to 36) were significantly higher than in patients with normal imaging findings. During 1-year follow-up, patients with normal imaging findings (n = 338) had an event rate of 3% (revascularization) with no MI or death (combined events: negative predictive value, 97%; 95% CI, 95% to 98%). Patients with abnormal imaging findings (n = 100) had a 42% event rate (combined events: RR, 14.2; 95% CI, 6.5 to 30; P < .001), with 11% experiencing MI and 8% cardiac death.
CONCLUSION: This strategy is a safe, effective method for rapid triage of chest pain patients. Rapid perfusion imaging plays a key role in the risk stratification of low-risk patients, allowing discrimination of unsuspected high risk patients who require prompt admission and possible intervention from those who are truly at low risk.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 8998090     DOI: 10.1016/s0196-0644(97)70317-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Emerg Med        ISSN: 0196-0644            Impact factor:   5.721


  65 in total

1.  Can acute rest imaging shorten evaluation in chest pain centers?

Authors:  F J Wackers
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  1999 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 2.  Myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  R J Gibbons
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 5.994

3.  Proceedings of the 4th Invitational Wintergreen Conference. Wintergreen, Virginia, USA. July 12-14, 1998. Abstracts.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  1999 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.952

4.  American Society of Nuclear Cardiology position statement on radionuclide imaging in patients with suspected acute ischemic syndromes in the emergency department or chest pain center.

Authors:  Frans J Th Wackers; Kenneth A Brown; Gary V Heller; Michael C Kontos; James L Tatum; James E Udelson; Jack A Ziffer
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2002 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 5.  The use of nuclear medicine techniques in the emergency department.

Authors:  B S McGlone; K K Balan
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 2.740

6.  Acute rest myocardial perfusion imaging in the emergency department: a technique whose time has come... or gone?

Authors:  Gary V Heller
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.952

7.  Imaging in the emergency department.

Authors:  Cynthia C Taub; Gary V Heller
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2003 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.952

8.  Emergency department assessment of patients with acute chest pain: myocardial perfusion imaging, blood tests, or both?

Authors:  Kevin C Allman; S Ben Freedman
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 9.  Radionuclide imaging in risk assessment after acute coronary syndromes.

Authors:  J E Udelson; E J Flint
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 10.  Imaging the myocardial ischemic cascade.

Authors:  Arthur E Stillman; Matthijs Oudkerk; David A Bluemke; Menko Jan de Boer; Jens Bremerich; Ernest V Garcia; Matthias Gutberlet; Pim van der Harst; W Gregory Hundley; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Dirkjan Kuijpers; Raymond Y Kwong; Eike Nagel; Stamatios Lerakis; John Oshinski; Jean-François Paul; Riemer H J A Slart; Vinod Thourani; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Bernd J Wintersperger
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 2.357

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.