Liberal Versus Restrictive Intravenous Fluid Therapy for Early Septic Shock: Rationale for a Randomized Trial

Prompt intravenous fluid therapy is a fundamental treatment for patients with septic shock. However, the optimal approach for administering intravenous fluid in septic shock resuscitation is unknown. Two competing strategies are emerging: a liberal fluids approach, consisting of a larger volume of initial fluid (50 to 75 mL/kg [4 to 6 L in an 80-kg adult] during the first 6 hours) and later use of vasopressors, versus a restrictive fluids approach, consisting of a smaller volume of initial fluid (≤30 mL/kg [≤2 to 3 L]), with earlier reliance on vasopressor infusions to maintain blood pressure and perfusion. Early fluid therapy may enhance or maintain tissue perfusion by increasing venous return and cardiac output. However, fluid administration may also have deleterious effects by causing edema within vital organs, leading to organ dysfunction and impairment of oxygen delivery. Conversely, a restrictive fluids approach primarily relies on vasopressors to reverse hypotension and maintain perfusion while limiting the administration of fluid. Both strategies have some evidence to support their use but lack robust data to confirm the benefit of one strategy over the other, creating clinical and scientific equipoise. As part of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury Network, we designed a randomized clinical trial to compare the liberal and restrictive fluids strategies, the Crystalloid Liberal or Vasopressor Early Resuscitation in Sepsis trial. The purpose of this article is to review the current literature on approaches to early fluid resuscitation in adults with septic shock and outline the rationale for the upcoming trial.

Validation of the No Objective Testing Rule and Comparison to the HEART Pathway

BACKGROUND

The no objective testing rule (NOTR) is a decision aid designed to safely identify emergency department (ED) patients with chest pain who do not require objective testing for coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to validate the NOTR in a cohort of U.S. ED patients with acute chest pain and compare its performance to the HEART Pathway.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of 282 participants enrolled in the HEART Pathway randomized controlled trial was conducted. Each patient was classified as low risk or at risk by the NOTR. Sensitivity for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30 days was calculated in the entire study population. NOTR and HEART Pathways were compared among patients randomized to the HEART Pathway in the parent trial using McNemar's test and the net reclassification improvement (NRI).

RESULTS

Major adverse cardiac events occurred in 22/282 (7.8%) participants, including no deaths, 16/282 (5.6%) with myocardial infarction (MI), and 6/282 (2.1%) with coronary revascularization without MI. NOTR was 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 84.6%-100%) sensitive for MACE and identified 78/282 patients (27.7%, 95% = CI 22.5-33.3%) as low risk. In the HEART Pathway arm (n = 141), both NOTR and HEART Pathway identified all patients with MACE as at risk. Compared to NOTR, the HEART Pathway was able to correctly reclassify 27 patients without MACE as low risk, yielding a NRI of 20.8% (95% CI = 11.3%-30.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Within a U.S. cohort of ED patients with chest pain, the NOTR and HEART Pathway were 100% sensitive for MACE at 30 days. However, the HEART Pathway identified more patients suitable for early discharge than the NOTR.

Use of the HEART Pathway with high sensitivity cardiac troponins: A secondary analysis

OBJECTIVES

The HEART Pathway combines a decision aid and serial contemporary cardiac troponin I (cTnI) measures to achieve >99% sensitivity for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30days and early discharge rates >20%. However, the impact of integrating high-sensitivity troponin (hs-cTn) measures into the HEART Pathway has yet to be determined. In this analysis we compare test characteristics of the HEART Pathway using hs-cTnI, hs-cTnT, or cTnI.

DESIGN & METHODS

A secondary analysis of participants enrolled in the HEART Pathway RCT was conducted. Each patient was risk stratified by the cTn-HEART Pathway (Siemens TnI-Ultra at 0- and 3-h) and a hs-cTn-HEART Pathway using hs-cTnI (Abbott) or hs-cTnT (Roche) at 3-h. The early discharge rate, sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value (NPV) for MACE (death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization) at 30days were calculated.

RESULTS

hs-cTnI measures were available on 133 patients. MACE occurred in 11/133 (8%) of these patients. Test characteristics for the HEART Pathway using serial cTnI vs 3hour hs-cTnI were the same: sensitivity (100%, 95%CI: 72-100%), specificity (49%, 95%CI: 40-58%), NPV (100%, 95%CI: 94-100%), and early discharge rate (45%, 95%CI: 37-54%). The HEART Pathway using hs-cTnT missed one MACE event (myocardial infarction): sensitivity (91%, 95%CI: 59-100%), specificity (48%, 95%CI: 39-57%), NPV (98%, 95%CI: 91-100%), and early discharge rate (45%, 95%CI: 37-54%).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in the test characteristics of the HEART Pathway whether using cTnI or hs-cTnI, with both achieving 100% sensitivity and NPV. Use of hs-cTnT with the HEART Pathway was associated with one missed MACE.

Can a Point-of-Care Troponin I Assay be as Good as a Central Laboratory Assay? A MIDAS Investigation

BACKGROUND

We aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the Alere Triage Cardio3 Tropinin I (TnI) assay (Alere, Inc., USA) and the PathFast cTnI-II (Mitsubishi Chemical Medience Corporation, Japan) against the central laboratory assay Singulex Erenna TnI assay (Singulex, USA).

METHODS

Using the Markers in the Diagnosis of Acute Coronary Syndromes (MIDAS) study population, we evaluated the ability of three different assays to identify patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The MIDAS dataset, described elsewhere, is a prospective multicenter dataset of emergency department (ED) patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and a planned objective myocardial perfusion evaluation. Myocardial infarction (MI) was diagnosed by central adjudication.

RESULTS

The C-statistic with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for diagnosing MI by using a common population (n=241) was 0.95 (0.91-0.99), 0.95 (0.91-0.99), and 0.93 (0.89-0.97) for the Triage, Singulex, and PathFast assays, respectively. Of samples with detectable troponin, the absolute values had high Pearson (R(P)) and Spearman (R(S)) correlations and were R(P)=0.94 and R(S)=0.94 for Triage vs Singulex, R(P)=0.93 and R(S)=0.85 for Triage vs PathFast, and R(P)=0.89 and R(S)=0.73 for PathFast vs Singulex.

CONCLUSIONS

In a single comparative population of ED patients with suspected ACS, the Triage Cardio3 TnI, PathFast, and Singulex TnI assays provided similar diagnostic performance for MI.

Cost analysis of the History, ECG, Age, Risk factors, and initial Troponin (HEART) Pathway randomized control trial

INTRODUCTION

The HEART Pathway is a diagnostic protocol designed to identify low-risk patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain that are safe for early discharge. This protocol has been shown to significantly decrease health care resource utilization compared with usual care. However, the impact of the HEART Pathway on the cost of care has yet to be reported.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a cost analysis of patients enrolled in the HEART Pathway trial, which randomized participants to either usual care or the HEART Pathway protocol. For low-risk patients, the HEART Pathway recommended early discharge from the emergency department without further testing. We compared index visit cost, cost at 30 days, and cardiac-related health care cost at 30 days between the 2 treatment arms. Costs for each patient included facility and professional costs. Cost at 30 days included total inpatient and outpatient costs, including the index encounter, regardless of etiology. Cardiac-related health care cost at 30 days included the index encounter and costs adjudicated to be cardiac-related within that period. Two hundred seventy of the 282 patients enrolled in the trial had cost data available for analysis. There was a significant reduction in cost for the HEART Pathway group at 30 days (median cost savings of $216 per individual), which was most evident in low-risk (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction score of 0-1) patients (median savings of $253 per patient) and driven primarily by lower cardiac diagnostic costs in the HEART Pathway group.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the HEART Pathway as a decision aid for patients with undifferentiated chest pain resulted in significant cost savings.

Clinical Assessment of a Point-of-Care Serum Amyloid A Assay in Foals with Bronchopneumonia

Background

Despite the paucity of data available, stall‐side serum amyloid (SAA) assays are commonly used to make diagnostic and treatment decisions in foals with bronchopneumonia.

Hypothesis

Measurement of SAA concentrations can accurately differentiate pneumonic from healthy foals.

Animals

Fifty‐four pneumonic foals between 3 weeks and 5 months of age were compared to 44 healthy controls. In addition, 47 foals on a farm endemic for R. equi infections were studied.

Methods

Serum samples were collected from pneumonic foals at hospital admission. Foals were categorized as having pneumonia caused by R. equi or by other microorganisms based on culture of a tracheobronchial aspirate. In addition, serum samples were obtained at 2‐week intervals from foals born at a farm endemic for R. equi. SAA concentrations were measured by a point‐of‐care assay. Diagnostic performance of SAA was assessed by use of receiver operating characteristic curves.

Results

Concentrations of SAA in foals with bronchopneumonia were significantly (P < 0.001) higher than those of healthy foals, but 15 of 54 pneumonic foals (28%) had SAA concentrations <5 μg/mL. There was no correlation between SAA concentrations and radiographic score in foals with R. equi pneumonia. The ability of SAA to predict development of R. equi pneumonia at the endemic farm was limited with a sensitivity of 64% and a specificity of 77%.

Conclusion and clinical importance

Overall, SAA concentrations are significantly higher in pneumonic than in healthy foals. However, performance of SAA in detecting pneumonic foals is limited by the high proportion of false‐positive and false‐negative results.

HEART Pathway Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol Implementation: Prospective Pre-Post Interrupted Time Series Design and Methods

Background

Most patients presenting to US Emergency Departments (ED) with chest pain are hospitalized for comprehensive testing. These evaluations cost the US health system >$10 billion annually, but have a diagnostic yield for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) of <10%. The history/ECG/age/risk factors/troponin (HEART) Pathway is an accelerated diagnostic protocol (ADP), designed to improve care for patients with acute chest pain by identifying patients for early ED discharge. Prior efficacy studies demonstrate that the HEART Pathway safely reduces cardiac testing, while maintaining an acceptably low adverse event rate.

Objective

The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness of HEART Pathway ADP implementation within a health system.

Methods

This controlled before-after study will accrue adult patients with acute chest pain, but without ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction on electrocardiogram for two years and is expected to include approximately 10,000 patients. Outcomes measures include hospitalization rate, objective cardiac testing rates (stress testing and angiography), length of stay, and rates of recurrent cardiac care for participants.

Results

In pilot data, the HEART Pathway decreased hospitalizations by 21%, decreased hospital length (median of 12 hour reduction), without increasing adverse events or recurrent care. At the writing of this paper, data has been collected on >5000 patient encounters. The HEART Pathway has been fully integrated into health system electronic medical records, providing real-time decision support to our providers.

Conclusions

We hypothesize that the HEART Pathway will safely reduce healthcare utilization. This study could provide a model for delivering high-value care to the 8-10 million US ED patients with acute chest pain each year.

ClinicalTrial

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02056964; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02056964 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6ccajsgyu)

Adherence to an Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol for Chest Pain: Secondary Analysis of the HEART Pathway Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVES

Accelerated diagnostic protocols (ADPs), such as the HEART Pathway, are gaining popularity in emergency departments (EDs) as tools used to risk stratify patients with acute chest pain. However, provider nonadherence may threaten the safety and effectiveness of ADPs. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency and impact of ADP nonadherence.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of participants enrolled in the HEART Pathway RCT was conducted. This trial enrolled 282 adult ED patients with symptoms concerning for acute coronary syndrome without ST-elevation on electrocardiogram. Patients randomized to the HEART Pathway (N = 141) were included in this analysis. Outcomes included index visit disposition, nonadherence, and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) at 30 days. MACE was defined as death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization. Nonadherence was defined as: 1) undertesting-discharging a high-risk patient from the ED without objective testing (stress testing or coronary angiography) or 2) overtesting-admitting or obtaining objective testing on a low-risk patient.

RESULTS

Nonadherence to the HEART Pathway occurred in 28 of 141 patients (20%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 14% to 27%). Overtesting occurred in 19 of 141 patients (13.5%, 95% CI = 8% to 19%) and undertesting in nine of 141 patients (6%, 95% CI = 3% to 12%). None of these 28 patients suffered MACE. The net effect of nonadherence was 10 additional admissions among patients identified as low-risk and appropriate for early discharge (absolute decrease in discharge rate of 7%, 95% CI = 3% to 13%).

CONCLUSIONS

Real-time use of the HEART Pathway resulted in a nonadherence rate of 20%, mostly due to overtesting. None of these patients had MACE within 30 days. Nonadherence decreased the discharge rate, attenuating the HEART Pathway's impact on health care use.

Performance of the 2-hour accelerated diagnostic protocol within the American College of Radiology Imaging Network PA 4005 cohort

OBJECTIVES

The 2-hour accelerated diagnostic protocol (ADAPT) is a decision rule designed to identify emergency department (ED) patients with chest pain for early discharge. Previous studies in the Asia-Pacific region demonstrated high sensitivity (97.9% to 99.7%) for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30 days. The objective of this study was to determine the validity of ADAPT for risk stratification in a cohort of U.S. ED patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

METHODS

A secondary analysis of participants enrolled in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) PA 4005 trial was conducted. This trial enrolled 1,369 patients at least 30 years old with symptoms suggestive of ACS. All data elements were collected prospectively at the time of enrollment. Each patient was classified as low risk or at risk by ADAPT. Early discharge rate and sensitivity for MACE, defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or coronary revascularization at 30 days, were calculated.

RESULTS

Of 1,140 patients with complete biomarker data, MACE occurred in 31 patients (2.7%). Among 551 of the 1,140 (48.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 45.4% to 51.3%), ADAPT identified for early discharge; five of the 551 (0.9%, 95% CI = 0.3% to 2.1%) had MACE at 30 days. ADAPT was 83.9% (95% CI = 66.3% to 94.5%) sensitive, identifying 26 of 31 patients with MACE. Of the five patients identified for early discharge by ADAPT with MACE, there were no deaths, one patient with MI, and five with revascularizations.

CONCLUSIONS

In this first North American application of the ADAPT strategy, sensitivity for MACE within 30 days was 83.9%. One missed adverse event was a MI, with the remainder representing coronary revascularizations. The effect of missing revascularization events needs further investigation.

The HEART Pathway randomized trial: identifying emergency department patients with acute chest pain for early discharge

BACKGROUND

The HEART Pathway is a decision aid designed to identify emergency department patients with acute chest pain for early discharge. No randomized trials have compared the HEART Pathway with usual care.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Adult emergency department patients with symptoms related to acute coronary syndrome without ST-elevation on ECG (n=282) were randomized to the HEART Pathway or usual care. In the HEART Pathway arm, emergency department providers used the HEART score, a validated decision aid, and troponin measures at 0 and 3 hours to identify patients for early discharge. Usual care was based on American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines. The primary outcome, objective cardiac testing (stress testing or angiography), and secondary outcomes, index length of stay, early discharge, and major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization), were assessed at 30 days by phone interview and record review. Participants had a mean age of 53 years, 16% had previous myocardial infarction, and 6% (95% confidence interval, 3.6%-9.5%) had major adverse cardiac events within 30 days of randomization. Compared with usual care, use of the HEART Pathway decreased objective cardiac testing at 30 days by 12.1% (68.8% versus 56.7%; P=0.048) and length of stay by 12 hours (9.9 versus 21.9 hours; P=0.013) and increased early discharges by 21.3% (39.7% versus 18.4%; P<0.001). No patients identified for early discharge had major adverse cardiac events within 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The HEART Pathway reduces objective cardiac testing during 30 days, shortens length of stay, and increases early discharges. These important efficiency gains occurred without any patients identified for early discharge suffering MACE at 30 days.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique Identifier: NCT01665521.

Frequency of electrocardiogram testing among HIV-infected patients at risk for medication-induced QTc prolongation

OBJECTIVES

HIV-infected patients are commonly prescribed several medications and are thus at risk for drug interactions that may result in QTc prolongation. We sought (1) to identify the frequency of electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring (2), to determine the prevalence of drug interactions involving QTc-prolonging medications, and (3) to quantify the prevalence of QTc prolongation.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among HIV-infected adults. Demographics, medications, drug interactions and comorbidities were abstracted from patients' medical records. Abnormal QTc interval was defined per the UK Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products. Clinical characteristics were compared among ECG recipients and nonrecipients. Among ECG recipients, the prevalence and predictors of QTc prolongation were assessed.

RESULTS

Among the 454 patients included in the study, 80.8% were prescribed a medication associated with QTc prolongation and 39% had drug interactions expected to increase QTc prolongation risk. There were 138 patients (30.3%) who received ECG testing. Receipt of ECG monitoring was associated with increasing age, diabetes, increasing total number of medications and gastroesophageal reflux disease. Among ECG recipients, the prevalence of abnormal QTc interval was 27.5%. Chronic kidney disease [prevalence ratio (PR) 3.47; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37-8.83; P = 0.009], hepatitis C virus coinfection (PR 2.26; 95% CI 0.97-5.27; P = 0.06) and hypertension (PR 2.11; 95% CI 0.93-4.81; P = 0.07) were independently associated with an abnormal QTc interval.

CONCLUSIONS

A low frequency of ECG testing was observed, despite a high use of medications associated with QTc prolongation. The risk of abnormal QTc interval was highest among patients with chronic kidney disease, hypertension and hepatitis C virus coinfection.

Central versus local adjudication of myocardial infarction in a cardiac biomarker trial

OBJECTIVES

The impact of regulatory requirements, which require central adjudication for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in cardiac biomarker studies, is unclear. We determined the impact of local (at the site of subject enrollment) versus central adjudication of AMI on final diagnosis.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of data from the Myeloperoxidase in the Diagnosis of Acute Coronary Syndromes Study, an 18-center prospective study of patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes, with enrollment from December 19, 2006, to September 20, 2007. Local adjudication of AMI was performed by a single site investigator at each center following the protocol-specified definition and according to the year 2000 definition of AMI, which based cardiac troponin (cTn) elevation on local cut points for each of the 13 different assays. After completion of the Myeloperoxidase in the Diagnosis of Acute Coronary Syndromes Study primary analysis and to evaluate a new troponin assay, a Food and Drug Administration-mandated central adjudication was performed by 3 investigators at different institutions. This adjudication used the 2007 Universal Definition of AMI, which differs by use of the manufacturer's 99th percentile cTn cut point. We describe the outcome of this process and compare it with the local adjudication. Central adjudicators were not blinded to local adjudications. For central adjudication, discrepant diagnoses were resolved by consensus. Local versus central cTn cut points differed for 6 assays. Both definitions required a rise and/or fall of cTn. Discrepant cases were reviewed by the lead author. Difficult cases were defined as having a difference between local and central adjudication, an elevated cTn with a temporal rise and fall, and a negative or absent risk stratification test. Statistics were by χ(2), κ, and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 1,107 patients enrolled, 11 had indeterminate central adjudication, leaving 1,096 for analysis. In spite of high agreement across central versus local adjudicators, κ = 0.79 (95% CI [0.73, 0.85]), AMI was diagnosed more often by central adjudication, 134 (12.2%) versus 104 (9.5%), with 44 local diagnoses (4%) changed from non-AMI to AMI (n = 37) or AMI to non-AMI (n = 7) (P < .001). These 44 represented 34% (95% CI 26%-42%) of 141 cases in which either central or local adjudication was AMI. Of diagnoses changed to AMI, 3 reasons contributed approximately one-third each: the local use of a non-99th percentile cTn cutoff (32%), the possibility of human error (34%), and difficult cases (34%).

CONCLUSION

Despite an acceptable κ, over a third of patients with a diagnosis of AMI were not assigned that diagnosis by both sets of adjudicators. This supports the importance of 1 standard method for diagnosis of AMI.

Incremental value of objective cardiac testing in addition to physician impression and serial contemporary troponin measurements in women

OBJECTIVES

Guidelines recommend that patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with chest pain who are at low risk for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) receive an objective cardiac evaluation with a stress test or coronary imaging. It is uncertain whether all women derive benefit from this process. The study aim was to determine the incremental value of objective cardiac testing after serial cardiac markers and physician risk assessment.

METHODS

Women enrolled in the 18-site Myeloperoxidase in the Diagnosis of Acute Coronary Syndrome (MIDAS) study had serial troponin I measured at time 0 and 90 minutes and physician risk assessment for the presence of ACS. Risk estimates obtained at the time of ED evaluation were dichotomized as high or non-high risk. The primary outcome was the composite of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or revascularization at 30 days. Logistic regression with receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves and net reclassification index were used to determine the diagnostic accuracy for the composite outcome of 30-day MI or revascularization for two models: 1) troponin I results and physician risk assessment alone and 2) troponin I results, physician risk assessment, and objective cardiac testing.

RESULTS

A total of 460 women with a median age 58 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 48.5 to 68 years) were included, and 32 (6.9%) experienced AMI or revascularization by 30 days. Comparison of the area under the ROC curves (AUC) showed that the addition of objective cardiac testing to the combination of troponin I results and physician risk assessment did not significantly improve prediction of 30-day AMI or revascularization (AUC = 0.85 vs. 0.89; p = .053). Using a threshold of 1%, net reclassification index showed that the addition of objective cardiac testing to troponin I results and physician risk assessment worsened the prediction for 30-day AMI and revascularization. All of the reclassified patients were false positives, with nine (2.1%) patients incorrectly reclassified from <1% risk to ≥ 1% risk of 30-day AMI or revascularization.

CONCLUSIONS

In the era of contemporary troponin assays, objective cardiac testing after an ED clinician risk assessment of non-high risk and negative troponin I results at 0 and 90 minutes does not improve the prediction of 30-day AMI or revascularization in women presenting with chest pain or other symptoms of cardiac ischemia.

Reduction in observation unit length of stay with coronary computed tomography angiography depends on time of emergency department presentation

OBJECTIVES

Prior studies demonstrating shorter length of stay (LOS) from coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) relative to stress testing in emergency department (ED) patients have not considered time of patient presentation. The objectives of this study were to determine whether low-risk chest pain patients receiving stress testing or CCTA have differences in ED plus observation unit (OU) LOS and if there are disparities in testing modality use, based on the time of patient presentation to the ED.

METHODS

The authors examined a cohort of low-risk chest pain patients evaluated in an ED-based OU using prospective and retrospective OU registry data. During the study period, stress testing and CCTA were both available from 08:00 to 17:00 hours. CCTA was not available on weekends, and therefore only subjects presenting on weekdays were included. Cox regression analysis was used to model the effect of testing modality (stress testing vs. CCTA) on OU LOS. Separate models were fit based on time of patient presentation to the ED using 4-hour blocks beginning at midnight. The primary independent variable was testing modality: stress testing or CCTA. Age, sex, and race were included as covariates. Logistic regression was used to model testing modality choice by time period adjusted for age, sex, and race.

RESULTS

Over the study period, 841 subjects presented Monday through Friday. Median LOS was 18.0 hours (interquartile range [IQR] = 11.7 to 22.9 hours). Objective cardiac testing was completed in 788 of 841 (94%) patients, with 496 (63%) receiving stress testing and 292 (37%) receiving CCTA. After age, race, and sex were adjusted for, patients presenting between 08:00 and 11:59 hours not only had a shorter LOS associated with CCTA (p < 0.0001), but also had a greater likelihood of being tested by CCTA (p = 0.001). None of the other time periods had significant differences in LOS or testing modality choice for CCTA relative to stress testing.

CONCLUSIONS

In an OU setting with weekday and standard business hours CCTA availability, CCTA testing was associated with shorter LOS among low-risk chest pain patients only in patients presenting to the ED between 08:00 and 11:59 hours. That time period was also associated with a greater likelihood of being tested by CCTA, suggesting that ED providers may have intuited the inability of CCTA to shorten LOS during other times.

Standardized reporting criteria for studies evaluating suspected acute heart failure syndromes in the emergency department

Heart failure requiring urgent therapy represents a burgeoning health care burden. Although acute heart failure syndromes are commonly defined as a change in chronic heart failure signs and symptoms requiring urgent therapy, the presentation, development, and response to treatment is highly dependent on individual patient characteristics. This heterogeneity has led to challenges in interpreting widely differing study methods, including eligibility requirements and outcome measures. To improve interpretation of results and translate such information to better patient care, it is essential to present an accurate description of the patient population and study design. Based on existing recommendations and expert consensus, the authors present standardized reporting criteria to improve interpretability of research in this challenging cohort.

Identifying patients for early discharge: performance of decision rules among patients with acute chest pain

BACKGROUND

The HEART score and North American Chest Pain Rule (NACPR) are decision rules designed to identify acute chest pain patients for early discharge without stress testing or cardiac imaging. This study compares the clinical utility of these decision rules combined with serial troponin determinations.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A secondary analysis was conducted of 1005 participants in the Myeloperoxidase In the Diagnosis of Acute coronary syndromes Study (MIDAS). MIDAS is a prospective observational cohort of Emergency Department (ED) patients enrolled from 18 US sites with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The ability to identify participants for early discharge and the sensitivity for ACS at 30 days were compared among an unstructured assessment, NACPR, and HEART score, each combined with troponin measures at 0 and 3h. ACS, defined as cardiac death, acute myocardial infarction, or unstable angina, occurred in 22% of the cohort. The unstructured assessment identified 13.5% (95% CI 11.5-16%) of participants for early discharge with 98% (95% CI 95-99%) sensitivity for ACS. The NACPR identified 4.4% (95% CI 3-6%) for early discharge with 100% (95% CI 98-100%) sensitivity for ACS. The HEART score identified 20% (95% CI 18-23%) for early discharge with 99% (95% CI 97-100%) sensitivity for ACS. The HEART score had a net reclassification improvement of 10% (95% CI 8-12%) versus unstructured assessment and 19% (95% CI 17-21%) versus NACPR.

CONCLUSIONS

The HEART score with 0 and 3 hour serial troponin measures identifies a substantial number of patients for early discharge while maintaining high sensitivity for ACS.

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

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.

Cholesteryl esters associated with acyl-CoA:cholesterol acyltransferase predict coronary artery disease in patients with symptoms of acute coronary syndrome

OBJECTIVES

Identifying the likelihood of a patient having coronary artery disease (CAD) at the time of emergency department (ED) presentation with chest pain could reduce the need for stress testing or coronary imaging after myocardial infarction (MI) has been excluded. The authors aimed to determine if a novel cardiac biomarker consisting of plasma cholesteryl ester (CE) levels typically derived from the activity of the enzyme acyl-CoA:cholesterol acyltransferase (ACAT2) are predictive of CAD in a clinical model.

METHODS

A single-center prospective cohort design enrolled participants with symptoms of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) or invasive angiography. Plasma samples were analyzed for CE composition with mass spectrometry. The primary endpoint was any CAD determined at angiography. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the relationship between the sum of the plasma concentrations from cholesteryl palmitoleate (16:1) and cholesteryl oleate (18:1) (defined as ACAT2-CE) and the presence of CAD. The added value of ACAT2-CE to the model was analyzed comparing the C-statistics and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI).

RESULTS

The study cohort was composed of 113 participants with a mean (± standard deviation [SD]) age of 49 (±11.7) years, 59% had CAD at angiography, and 23% had an MI within 30 days. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) plasma concentration of ACAT2-CE was 938 μmol/L (IQR = 758 to 1,099 μmol/L) in patients with CAD and 824 μmol/L (IQR = 683 to 998 μmol/L) in patients without CAD (p = 0.03). When considered with age, sex, and the number of conventional CAD risk factors, ACAT2-CE levels were associated with a 6.5% increased odds of having CAD per 10 μmol/L increase in concentration. The addition of ACAT2-CE significantly improved the C-statistic (0.89 vs. 0.95, p = 0.0035) and IDI (0.15, p < 0.001) compared to the reduced model. In the subgroup of low-risk observation unit patients, the CE model had superior discrimination compared to the Diamond-Forrester classification (IDI = 0.403, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Plasma levels of ACAT2-CE have strong potential to predict a patient's likelihood of having CAD when considered in a clinical model but not when used alone. In turn, a clinical model containing ACAT2-CE could reduce the need for cardiac imaging after the exclusion of MI.

CT angiography for safe discharge of patients with possible acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND

Admission rates among patients presenting to emergency departments with possible acute coronary syndromes are high, although for most of these patients, the symptoms are ultimately found not to have a cardiac cause. Coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) has a very high negative predictive value for the detection of coronary disease, but its usefulness in determining whether discharge of patients from the emergency department is safe is not well established.

METHODS

We randomly assigned low-to-intermediate-risk patients presenting with possible acute coronary syndromes, in a 2:1 ratio, to undergo CCTA or to receive traditional care. Patients were enrolled at five centers in the United States. Patients older than 30 years of age with a Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction risk score of 0 to 2 and signs or symptoms warranting admission or testing were eligible. The primary outcome was safety, assessed in the subgroup of patients with a negative CCTA examination, with safety defined as the absence of myocardial infarction and cardiac death during the first 30 days after presentation.

RESULTS

We enrolled 1370 subjects: 908 in the CCTA group and 462 in the group receiving traditional care. The baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups. Of 640 patients with a negative CCTA examination, none died or had a myocardial infarction within 30 days (0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0 to 0.57). As compared with patients receiving traditional care, patients in the CCTA group had a higher rate of discharge from the emergency department (49.6% vs. 22.7%; difference, 26.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 21.4 to 32.2), a shorter length of stay (median, 18.0 hours vs. 24.8 hours; P<0.001), and a higher rate of detection of coronary disease (9.0% vs. 3.5%; difference, 5.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 0 to 11.2). There was one serious adverse event in each group.

CONCLUSIONS

A CCTA-based strategy for low-to-intermediate-risk patients presenting with a possible acute coronary syndrome appears to allow the safe, expedited discharge from the emergency department of many patients who would otherwise be admitted. (Funded by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Health and the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Foundation; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00933400.).