Dataset Information

Performance of the EDACS-accelerated Diagnostic Pathway in a Cohort of US Patients with Acute Chest Pain.

ABSTRACT: The Emergency Department Assessment of Chest pain Score-Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol (EDACS-ADP) is a decision aid designed to safely identify emergency department (ED) patients with chest pain for early discharge. Derivation and validation studies in Australasia have demonstrated high sensitivity (99%-100%) for major adverse cardiac events (MACE).To validate the EDACS-ADP in a cohort of US ED patients with symptoms suspicious for acute coronary syndrome (ACS).A secondary analysis of participants enrolled in the HEART Pathway Randomized Controlled Trial was conducted. This single-site trial enrolled 282 ED patients?21 years old with symptoms concerning for ACS, inclusive of all cardiac risk levels. Each patient was classified as low risk or at risk by the EDACS-ADP based on EDACS, electrocardiogram, and serial troponins. Potential early discharge rate and sensitivity for MACE at 30 days, defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or coronary revascularization were calculated.MACE occurred in 17/282 (6.0%) participants, including no deaths, 16/282 (5.6%) with MI, and 1/282 (0.4%) with coronary revascularization without MI. The EDACS-ADP identified 188/282 patients [66.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 60.8%-72.1%] as low risk. Of these, 2/188 (1.1%, 95% CI: 0.1%-3.9%) had MACE at 30 days. EDACS-ADP was 88.2% (95% CI: 63.6%-98.5%) sensitive for MACE, identifying 15/17 patients. Of the 2 patients identified as low risk with MACE, 1 had MI and 1 had coronary revascularization without MI.Within a US cohort of ED patients with symptoms concerning for ACS, sensitivity for MACE was 88.2%. We are unable to validate the EDACS-ADP as sufficiently sensitive for clinical use.

SUBMITTER: Stopyra JP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4648698 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Performance of the EDACS-accelerated Diagnostic Pathway in a Cohort of US Patients with Acute Chest Pain.

Stopyra Jason P JP Miller Chadwick D CD Hiestand Brian C BC Lefebvre Cedric W CW Nicks Bret A BA Cline David M DM Askew Kim L KL Riley Robert F RF Russell Gregory B GB Hoekstra James W JW Mahler Simon A SA

Critical pathways in cardiology 20151201 4

<h4>Background</h4>The Emergency Department Assessment of Chest pain Score-Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol (EDACS-ADP) is a decision aid designed to safely identify emergency department (ED) patients with chest pain for early discharge. Derivation and validation studies in Australasia have demonstrated high sensitivity (99%-100%) for major adverse cardiac events (MACE).<h4>Objectives</h4>To validate the EDACS-ADP in a cohort of US ED patients with symptoms suspicious for acute coronary syndrome ...[more]

PMID: 26569652

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe History Electrocardiogram Age Risk factor Troponin (HEART) Pathway and Emergency Department Assessment of Chest pain Score (EDACS) are validated accelerated diagnostic pathways designed to risk stratify patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain. Data from large multisite prospective studies comparing these accelerated diagnostic pathways are limited.MethodsThe HEART Pathway Implementation is a prospective three-site cohort study, which accrued adults with symptoms concerning for acute coronary syndrome. Physicians completed electronic health record HEART Pathway and EDACS risk assessments on participants. Major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction and coronary revascularisation) at 30 days were determined using electronic health record, insurance claims and death index data. Test characteristics for detection of major adverse cardiac events were calculated for both accelerated diagnostic pathways and McNemar's tests were used for comparisons.Results5799 patients presenting to the emergency department were accrued, of which HEART Pathway and EDACS assessments were completed on 4399. Major adverse cardiac events at 30 days occurred in 449/4399 (10.2%). The HEART Pathway identified 38.4% (95% CI 37.0% to 39.9%) of patients as low-risk compared with 58.1% (95% CI 56.6% to 59.6%) identified as low-risk by EDACS (p<0.001). Major adverse cardiac events occurred in 0.4% (95% CI 0.2% to 0.9%) of patients classified as low-risk by the HEART Pathway compared with 1.0% (95% CI 0.7% to 1.5%) of patients identified as low-risk by EDACS (p<0.001). Thus, the HEART Pathway had a negative predictive value of 99.6% (95% CI 99.1% to 99.8%) for major adverse cardiac events compared with a negative predictive value of 99.0% (95% CI 98.5% to 99.3%) for EDACS.ConclusionsEDACS identifies a larger proportion of patients as low-risk than the HEART Pathway, but has a higher missed major adverse cardiac events rate at 30 days. Physicians will need to consider their risk tolerance when deciding whether to adopt the HEART Pathway or EDACS accelerated diagnostic pathway.Trial registration numberNCT02056964.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients from racial and ethnic minority groups presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) with chest pain experience lower odds of receiving stress testing compared with nonminorities. Studies have demonstrated that care pathways administered within the ED can reduce health disparities, but this has yet to be studied as a strategy to increase stress testing equity. METHODS:A secondary analysis from 3 randomized clinical trials involving ED patients with acute chest pain was performed to determine whether a care pathway, ACES (Accelerated Chest pain Evaluation with Stress imaging), reduces the racial disparity in index visit cardiac testing between African American (AA) and White patients. Three hundred thirty-four participants with symptoms and findings indicating intermediate to high risk for acute coronary syndrome were enrolled in 3 clinical trials. Major exclusions were ST-segment elevation, initial troponin elevation, and hemodynamic instability. Participants were randomly assigned to receive usual inpatient care, or ACES. The ACES care pathway includes placement in observation for serial cardiac markers, with an expectation for stress imaging. The primary outcome was index visit objective cardiac testing, compared among AA and White participants. RESULTS:AA participants represented 111/329 (34%) of the study population, 80/220 (36%) of the ACES group and 31/109 (28%) of the usual care group. In usual care, objective testing occurred less frequently among AA (22/31, 71%) than among White (69/78, 88%, P = 0.027) participants, primarily driven by cardiac catheterization (3% vs. 24%; P = 0.012). In ACES, testing rates did not differ by race [AA 78/80 (98%) vs. White 138/140 (99%); P = 0.623]. At 90 days, death, MI, and revascularization did not differ in either group between AA and White participants. CONCLUSIONS:A care pathway with the expectation for stress imaging eliminates the racial disparity among AA and White participants with chest pain in the acquisition of index-visit cardiovascular testing.

Project description:Circulating microRNA has recently emerged as a promising biomarker for cardiovascular disease. This study sought to evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic value of circulating miR-133a as a marker of acute myocardial infarction in acute chest pain patients undergoing coronary angiography.Plasma was collected from 312 patients with chest pain on admission in the emergency department and 67 healthy controls. MiR-133a was detected using real-time quantitative PCR and enhanced accu-TnI, creatinine kinase-MB mass, and myoglobin were measured by immunoassay. End-point events (serious adverse cardiovascular events which require hospitalization or cardiovascular death) were examined in the AMI (acute myocardical infarction) group within 1, 6, 12, and 24 months.The miR-133a level was higher in AMI patients than in non-AMI patients (P?<?0.001). In the ROC analysis, the sensitivity of miR-133a in diagnosis of AMI is 0.61 and the specificity is 0.68. In the prognostic analysis, only 1 endpoint event was observed in the non-AMI group; the amount of cases with end-point events in the AMI group at 1,6,12, and 24 months were 8, 19, 28, and 35, respectively. The cutoff value of miR-133a was determined using the median value of the AMI group and separated the patients into a positive group and a negative group. The Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed no significant difference in survival was detected in AMI patients between the miR-133a positive group and negative group after follow-up (12-month: x2?=?1.353, P?=?0.245; 24-month: x2?=?3.722, P?=?0.054). After adjusting for age, gender, Killip classes, prior myocardiac infarction history, myoglobin, LVEF (left ventricular ejection fraction), diabetes, hypertension, smoking and systolic blood pressure, miR133a had a significant association with the risk of events at 12 months (HR?=?2.869, P?=?0.024) and 24 months (HR?=?3.936, P?=?0.001).In patients undergoing coronary angiography, circulating miR-133a is upregulated in AMI patients, but it does not provide enough accuracy for clinical AMI diagnosis because it also rises in unstable angina patients. Its prognostic value in AMI is uncertain mainly for the number of cases with end-point event was small and may be further validated in a larger, better designed study.

Project description:Study objectiveWe determine whether implementation of the HEART (History, ECG, Age, Risk Factors, Troponin) Pathway is safe and effective in emergency department (ED) patients with possible acute coronary syndrome through 1 year of follow-up.MethodsA preplanned analysis of 1-year follow-up data from a prospective pre-post study of 8,474 adult ED patients with possible acute coronary syndrome from 3 US sites was conducted. Patients included were aged 21 years or older, evaluated for possible acute coronary syndrome, and without ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Accrual occurred for 12 months before and after HEART Pathway implementation, from November 2013 to January 2016. The HEART Pathway was integrated into the electronic health record at each site as an interactive clinical decision support tool. After integration, ED providers prospectively used the HEART Pathway to identify patients with possible acute coronary syndrome as low risk (appropriate for early discharge without stress testing or angiography) or nonlow risk (appropriate for further inhospital evaluation). Safety (all-cause death and myocardial infarction) and effectiveness (hospitalization) at 1 year were determined from health records, insurance claims, and death index data.ResultsPreimplementation and postimplementation cohorts included 3,713 and 4,761 patients, respectively. The HEART Pathway identified 30.7% of patients as low risk; 97.5% of them were free of death and myocardial infarction within 1 year. Hospitalization at 1 year was reduced by 7.0% in the postimplementation versus preimplementation cohort (62.1% versus 69.1%; adjusted odds ratio 0.70; 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.78). Rates of death or myocardial infarction at 1 year were similar (11.6% versus 12.4%; adjusted odds ratio 1.00; 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.16).ConclusionHEART Pathway implementation was associated with decreased hospitalizations and low adverse event rates among low-risk patients at 1-year follow-up.

Dataset Information

Performance of the EDACS-accelerated Diagnostic Pathway in a Cohort of US Patients with Acute Chest Pain.

Publications

Performance of the EDACS-accelerated Diagnostic Pathway in a Cohort of US Patients with Acute Chest Pain.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure