Does an imaging stress-test adds information to prognostic scores in patients with chest pain in the emergency department?

Use of downstream stress imaging tests for risk stratification of patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain and low HEART score

BACKGROUND

Patients with low HEART (History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk factors, and Troponin level) risk scores who are discharged from the emergency department (ED) may present clinical challenges and diagnostic dilemmas. The use of downstream non-invasive stress imaging (NISI) tests in this population remains uncertain. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the value of NISI in risk stratification and predicting cardiac events in patients with low-risk HEART scores (LRHSs).

METHODS

We prospectively included 1384 patients with LRHSs between March 2019 and March 2021. All the patients underwent NISI (involving myocardial perfusion imaging/stress echocardiography). The primary endpoints included cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and unplanned coronary revascularisation. Secondary endpoints encompassed cardiovascular-related admissions or ED visits.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 64±14 years, with 670 (48.4%) being women. During the 634±104 days of follow-up, 58 (4.2%) patients experienced 62 types of primary endpoints, while 60 (4.3%) developed secondary endpoints. Multivariable Cox models, adjusted for clinical and imaging variables, showed that diabetes (HR: 2.38; p=0.008), HEART score of 3 (HR: 1.32; p=0.01), history of coronary artery disease (HR: 2.75; p=0.003), ECG changes (HR: 5.11; p<0.0001) and abnormal NISI (HR: 16.4; p<0.0001) were primary endpoint predictors, while abnormal NISI was a predictor of secondary endpoints (HR: 3.05; p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

NISI significantly predicted primary cardiac events and cardiovascular-related readmissions/ED visits in patients with LRHSs.

Using HEART2 score to risk stratify chest pain patients in the Emergency Department: an observational study

BACKGROUND

A significant number of chest pain patients had previous cardiac imaging tests (CIT) performed before being presented to the Emergency Department (ED). The HEART (history, electrocardiogram, age, risk factors, and troponin) score has been used to risk-stratify chest pain patients in the ED, but not particularly for patients with CIT performed. We aim to modify the current HEART score with the addition of most recent CIT findings (referred to as HEART2 score), to predict a 30-day major adverse cardiac event (MACE) among ED chest pain patients, compare the performance accuracy of using HEART versus HEART2 score for 30-day MACE outcome predictions, and further determine the value of HEART2 in a subset group of ED chest pain patients (i.e., ones with previous CIT).

METHODS

This is a single-center observational study. We included chest pain patients with HEART scores calculated during their index ED visits. A modified HEART2 score was developed with the addition of CIT findings as one of the HEART2 components. Patients were divided into three groups, including low (≤ 3), moderate (4-6), and high-risk HEART/HEART2 scores (≥ 7). MACE occurrence of a patient with different risks of HEART and HEART2 scores and overall performance accuracy of HEART versus HEART2 score predicting MACE outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

We included a total of 9419 chest pain patients at ED, among which one out of five patients (1874/9419) had previous CIT performed. Fewer (38.2%) of such patients had low-risk HEART scores in comparison to 55.5% of low-risk HEART2 scores (p < 0.001). The MACE outcomes were similar in low-risk HEART patients compared with low-risk HEART2 patients (2.2% versus 3.1%, p = 0.3021). The overall performance accuracy of using the HEART2 score to stratify chest pain patients with previous CIT was better than using the HEART score's (AUC 0.74 versus 0.71, p = 0.0082).

CONCLUSIONS

Using the HEART2 score might be suitable to stratify low-to-moderate risk chest pain patients at ED with a similar 30-days MACE occurrence compared to the HEART score. More importantly, with the use of similar low-risk criteria (HEART2 ≤ 3), over 45% more chest pain patients with previous CIT performed could be discharged directly from ED.