Troponin-positive, MB-negative patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: An undertreated but high-risk patient group: Results from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network-Get With The Guidelines (NCDR ACTION-GWTG) Registry

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. Structure: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This executive summary of the clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. These guidelines present an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This executive summary of the clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. Structure: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. These guidelines present an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

Troponin Marker for Acute Coronary Occlusion and Patient Outcome Following Cardiac Arrest

INTRODUCTION

The utility of troponin as a marker for acute coronary occlusion and patient outcome after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is unclear. We sought to determine whether initial or peak troponin was associated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), OHCA survival or neurological outcome.

METHODS

Single-center retrospective-cohort study of OHCA patients treated in a comprehensive clinical pathway from November 2007 to October 2012. Troponin I levels were acquired at presentation, four and eight hours after arrest, and then per physician discretion. Cardiac catheterization was at the cardiologist's discretion. Survival and outcome were determined at hospital discharge, with cerebral performance category score 1-2 defined as a good neurological outcome.

RESULTS

We enrolled 277 patients; 58% had a shockable rhythm, 44% survived, 41% good neurological outcome. Of the 107 (38%) patients who underwent cardiac catheterization, 30 (28%) had PCI. Initial ED troponin (median, ng/mL) was not different in patients requiring PCI vs no PCI (0.32 vs 0.09, p=0.06), although peak troponin was higher (4.19 versus 1.57, p=0.02). Of the 85 patients who underwent cardiac catheterization without STEMI (n=85), there was no difference in those who received PCI vs no PCI in initial troponin (0.22 vs 0.06, p=0.40) or peak troponin (2.58 vs 1.43, p=0.27). Regarding outcomes, there was no difference in initial troponin in survivors versus non-survivors (0.09 vs 0.22, p=0.11), or those with a good versus poor neurological outcome (0.09 vs 0.20, p=0.11). Likewise, there was no difference in peak troponin in survivors versus non-survivors (1.64 vs 1.23, p=0.07), or in those with a good versus poor neurological outcome (1.57 vs 1.26, p=0.14).

CONCLUSION

In our single-center patient cohort, peak troponin, but not initial troponin, was associated with higher likelihood of PCI, while neither initial nor peak troponin were associated with survival or neurological outcome in OHCA patients.

Expert Group on Biomarkers. Biomarkers in Cardiology - Part 2: In Coronary Heart Disease, Valve Disease and Special Situations

Cardiovascular diseases are the main causes of mortality and morbidity in Brazil. Their primary and secondary preventions are a priority for the health system and require multiple approaches for increased effectiveness. Biomarkers are tools used to identify with greater accuracy high-risk individuals, establish a faster diagnosis, guide treatment, and determine prognosis. This review aims to highlight the importance of biomarkers in clinical cardiology practice and raise relevant points regarding their application and perspectives for the next few years. This document was divided into two parts. This second part addresses the application of biomarkers in coronary heart disease, valvular diseases, cardio-oncology, pulmonary embolism, and cardiorenal syndrome.

Trends in cardiac biomarker testing in China for patients with acute myocardial infarction, 2001 to 2011: China PEACE-retrospective AMI study

Objectives

To describe trends in the availability of biomarker testing in Chinese hospitals and how practice complies with established standards for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Background

Cardiac biomarker testing is standard in high-income countries, but little is known about the availability and use of cardiac biomarker testing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) such as China.

Methods

Based on a nationally representative sample of Chinese hospitals in 2001, 2006 and 2011, we describe the temporal trends and regional differences in the hospital capability and rates of use of cardiac biomarker testing, as well as the variation in use across hospitals with testing capability, for patients labeled with the diagnosis of AMI.

Results

We sampled 175 hospitals (162 participated in the study) and 18,631 AMI admissions. 14,370 patients were included in analysis of biomarker use. The proportion of hospitals with biomarker testing capability was 57.4% in 2001 (25.0% troponin and 32.4% creatine kinase MB fraction (CK-MB) only) and 96.3% (81.4% troponin and 14.9% CK-MB only) in 2011. The proportion of hospitals with troponin testing capability in 2011 was significantly higher in urban compared with rural hospitals (96.8% vs. 71.4%, p< 0.001). In 2011, only 55.9% of hospitals with troponin testing capability (71 out of 127 hospitals) used the assay for more than 80% of their patients with AMI. Among hospitals with either biomarker testing capability, there was marked variation in use in both rural (from 7.1% to 100.0% of patients) and urban hospitals (from 57.9% to 100.0% of patients). In 2011, 36.1% of the patients with AMI did not have troponin tested and 4.9% did not have either biomarker measured.

Conclusions

The recommended biomarker tests for AMI diagnosis are not universally available and the testing is not consistently applied when it is available in China.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01624883

National trends in stroke after acute myocardial infarction among Medicare patients in the United States: 1999 to 2010

BACKGROUND

Stroke is a common and important adverse event after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the elderly. It is unclear whether the risk of stroke after AMI has changed with improvements in treatments and outcomes for AMI in the last decade.

METHODS

To assess trends in risk of stroke after AMI, we used a national sample of Medicare data to identify Fee-for-Service patients (n = 2,305,441) aged ≥65 years who were discharged alive after hospitalization for AMI from 1999 to 2010.

RESULTS

We identified 57,848 subsequent hospitalizations for ischemic stroke and 4,412 hospitalizations for hemorrhagic stroke within 1 year after AMI. The 1-year rate of ischemic stroke decreased from 3.4% (95% CI 3.3%-3.4%) to 2.6% (2.5%-2.7%; P < .001). The risk-adjusted annual decline was 3% (hazard ratio, 0.97; [0.97-0.98]) and was similar across all age and sex-race groups. The rate of hemorrhagic stroke remained stable at 0.2% and did not differ by subgroups. The 30-day mortality for patients admitted with ischemic stroke after AMI decreased from 19.9% (18.8%-20.9%) to 18.3% (17.1%-19.6%) and from 48.3% (43.0%-53.6%) to 45.7% (40.3%-51.2%) for those admitted with hemorrhagic stroke. We observed a decrease in 1-year mortality from 37.8% (36.5%-39.1%) to 35.3% (33.8%-36.8%) for ischemic stroke and from 66.6% (61.4%-71.5%) to 60.6% (55.1%-65.9%) for hemorrhagic stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

From 1999 to 2010, the 1-year risk for ischemic stroke after AMI declined, whereas the risk of hemorrhagic stroke remained unchanged. However, 30-day and 1-year mortality continued to be high.

Redefining myocardial infarction: what is new in the ESC/ACCF/AHA/WHF Third Universal Definition of myocardial infarction?

Myocardial infarction (MI) is a major cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Each year, an estimated 785,000 persons will have a new MI in the United States alone, and approximately every minute an American will succumb to one.1 In addition, MI has major psychological and legal implications for patients and the society and is an important outcome measure in research studies. The prevalence of MI provides useful data regarding the burden of coronary artery disease and offers insight into health care planning, policy, and resource allocation. The importance of accurately and reproducibly defining MI is therefore self-evident. The Third Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction (MI) expert consensus document was published in October 2012 by the global Myocardial Infarction Task Force.2 This landmark document was cosponsored by multiple cardiovascular societies and included both updated definitions and a modified classification of MI that have important clinical, epidemiological, and research implications. We hereby present a critical overview of this important document and summarize its key recommendations.

Determination of 19 cardiac troponin I and T assay 99th percentile values from a common presumably healthy population

BACKGROUND

Between-assay comparability of 99th percentiles for cardiac troponin concentrations has not been assessed systematically in a single population for a large number of assays.

METHODS

We determined 99th percentiles for 19 cardiac troponin assays in heparin plasma samples from a population of 272 and 252 presumably healthy males and females, respectively. The assays evaluated included 1 cardiac troponin T (cTnT) assay from Roche and 18 cTnI assays from Abbott, Alere, Beckman, bioMerieux, Instrumentation Laboratory, Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Singulex, Siemens, and Roche. Five of these assays were categorized as high-sensitivity, 9 as sensitive-contemporary, and 5 as point-of-care (POC) assays.

RESULTS

For high-sensitivity cTnI (hs-cTnI) assays 99th percentiles varied from 23 to 58 ng/L. At least 80% of individuals had measurable hs-cTnI, whereas only 25% had measurable high-sensitivity cTnT. All high-sensitivity cardic troponin assays had 99th percentiles that were 1.2-2.4-fold higher in males than females. For the 9 sensitive-contemporary cTnI assays, 99th percentiles varied from 12 to 392 ng/L, and only the Beckman assay gave measurable concentrations in a substantial portion of the population (35% vs ≤6% for the others). Seven of these 9 assays had 1.3-5.0-fold higher 99th percentiles for males than females. For 5 cTnI POC assays, 99th percentiles varied from <10 to 40 ng/L. The Instrumentation Laboratory assay gave measurable results in 27.8% of study participants vs ≤6% for the others. Correlations were generally poor among assays.

CONCLUSIONS

Among cardiac troponin assays 99th percentile concentrations appear to differ. High-sensitivity assays provide measurable cardiac troponin results in a substantially greater fraction of presumably healthy individuals.