Emergency medicine
Madhushri Vadhone Dinesh; Aruna Chala Ramesh; Keshava Murthy M Rangaswamy; Hariprasad Kanakapura Veerendranath
Volume 8, Issue 2 , July 2022, , Pages 134-140
Abstract
Objective: Chest pain is amongst the most frequently occurring symptoms in patientspresenting to the emergency department (ED). Accurate and fast risk stratification isparamountforidentification of patients with immediate risk of acute coronary syndrome(ACS). The present study has compared different ...
Read More
Objective: Chest pain is amongst the most frequently occurring symptoms in patientspresenting to the emergency department (ED). Accurate and fast risk stratification isparamountforidentification of patients with immediate risk of acute coronary syndrome(ACS). The present study has compared different scoring systems like HEART (History,ECG,Age,Risk factors, Troponin), ThrombolysisinMyocardial Infarction (TIMI), andGlobalRegistryofAcuteCoronaryEvents(GRACE)scores andtheir efficacyinpredicting incidenceof major adverse cardiac events(MACE).Methods: The present prospective observational study was conducted on 199 patientswho presented in the ED with complaint of chest pain. HEART, GRACE and TIMI scoreswere calculated with collected patient data which was further evaluated for efficacy bycalculating area under ROC curves (AUCs). Data were analyzed by using R statisticalsoftware version 4.0.3 and Microsoft Excel. P value less than or equal to 0.05 indicatesstatistical significance.Results:Inthecurrentstudy,76(38%)patientsreportedMACE.TheHEARTscoreidentifiedthelargestnumberofpatientsashighrisk74(37%)andamongthem69patientsdevelopedaMACE.TheAUCofHEART scorewasthehighestwith0.96(95%CI:0.93-0.98),followedbyTIMIscore with 0.815 (95% CI: 0.75-0.873) and the GRACE score with 0.814 (95% CI: 0.75-0.813). The sensitivity of HEART score of ≥7 for MACE wasfound to be 90.78%,specificitywas 95.96%, positive predictive value (PPV) was 93.24% and negative predictive value(NPV) was 94.4%. The sensitivity of GRACE score was 39.4%, specificity was 95.16%, PPVwas 83.3% and NPV was 71.95%. The sensitivity of TIMI score was 30.2%, specificity was95.96%, PPV was 82.14% and NPV was 69.18%.Conclusion:TheHEARTscoreshowedhigherefficacyinpredictingrisklevelsinpatientsandincidenceofMACE incomparisonwithGRACE andTIMIscoresintheincludedstudy cohort.
Emergency medicine
elnaz vahidi; Maryam Beladi; Ahmad Abbasian; Amirhosein Jahanshir; Javad Seyedhosseini
Volume 8, Issue 1 , January 2022, , Pages 19-25
Abstract
Objective: Disposition in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is pivotal in an emergency department (ED). HEART score is a recent scoring system for finding primary endpoints in undetermined ACS. This study aimed at evaluating the predictive value of HEART score in ACS outcome and disposition.Methods: In this ...
Read More
Objective: Disposition in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is pivotal in an emergency department (ED). HEART score is a recent scoring system for finding primary endpoints in undetermined ACS. This study aimed at evaluating the predictive value of HEART score in ACS outcome and disposition.Methods: In this prospective study, all patients with chest pain presentation compatible with our inclusion criteria referring to ED were enrolled during one year. Demographic data, triage level, hospital length of stay, admission ward, coronary angiography result, HEART score, thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) score, 1-month primary ACS endpoints and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were evaluated.Results: In our studied population (200 cases), 49 patients (24.5%) had at least one score for MACE. Comparing the prognostic values of TIMI vs HEART score in MACE revealed that the HEART had a larger AUC. The best cut-off point of HEART score in MACE prediction was calculated to be ≥5. There was a statistically significant relation between HEART score and hospital length of stay. The higher the HEART score, the more probability of patients being admitted to either hospital cardiac ward or coronary care unit (CCU). There was a significant relationship between the triage level and HEART score. Patients with higher HEART score had more acuity (lower triage level 1 or 2).Conclusion: HEART predicted MACE better than TIMI in low risk ACS. Patients with higher HEART score were more admitted to the hospital with longer hospital stay and patients with lower HEART score had higher triage level with less acuity.
Surgery
Mustafa Bolatkale; Çağdaş Can; Ahmet Çağdaş Acara; Mustafa Topuz
Volume 3, Issue 2 , July 2017, , Pages 40-41
Abstract
In emergency department, physicians can diagnose pulseless electrical activity, asystole, pericardial effusions, ischemic heart disease, wall motion abnormalities, valvular cardiac disease volume status or global cardiac function evaluating with electrocardiographic findings or using bedside cardiac ...
Read More
In emergency department, physicians can diagnose pulseless electrical activity, asystole, pericardial effusions, ischemic heart disease, wall motion abnormalities, valvular cardiac disease volume status or global cardiac function evaluating with electrocardiographic findings or using bedside cardiac ultrasonography. But these two methods are not always sufficient to explain the underlying another pathologies such as pancreatitis and acute cholecystitis which can mimick acute cardiac events. Patients who are followed up with a preliminary diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome in the emergency department, might have underlying biliary or pancreatic pathologies, or even more, these might be the sole reason of the clinical picture. So bedside abdomen ultrasonography and liver enzymes may be requested in all patients with suspected cardiac pathology with a normal cardiac ultrasonography when a patient presented with acute chest or abdominal pain. Physicians must be aware for coexisting pathophysiologies and take into account the differential diagnosis of all life-threatening causes such as cardiac ischemia or acute abdominal situations. So the diagnostic tests for gallbladder pathology could be added to cardiac ultrasonography.