Safety, feasibility, and results of exercise testing for stratifying patients with chest pain in the emergency room.

2Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess safety, feasibility, and the results of early exercise testing in patients with chest pain admitted to the emergency room of the chest pain unit, in whom acute myocardial infarction and high-risk unstable angina had been ruled out. METHODS: A study including 1060 consecutive patients with chest pain admitted to the emergency room of the chest pain unit was carried out. Of them, 677 (64%) patients were eligible for exercise testing, but only 268 (40%) underwent the test. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients studied was 51.7 12.1 years, and 188 (70%) were males. Twenty-eight (10%) patients had a previous history of coronary artery disease, 244 (91%) had a normal or unspecific electrocardiogram, and 150 (56%) underwent exercise testing within a 12-hour interval. The results of the exercise test in the latter group were as follows: 34 (13%) were positive, 191 (71%) were negative, and 43 (16%) were inconclusive. In the group of patients with a positive exercise test, 21 (62%) underwent coronary angiography, 11 underwent angioplasty, and 2 underwent myocardial revascularization. In a univariate analysis, type A/B chest pain (definitely/probably anginal) (p<0.0001), previous coronary artery disease (p<0.0001), and route 2 (patients at higher risk) correlated with a positive or inconclusive test (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: In patients with chest pain and in whom acute myocardial infarction and high-risk unstable angina had been ruled out, the exercise test proved to be feasible, safe, and well tolerated.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Macaciel, R. M., Mesquita, E. T., Vivacqua, R., Serra, S., Campos, A., Miranda, M., … Bassan, R. (2003). Safety, feasibility, and results of exercise testing for stratifying patients with chest pain in the emergency room. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, 81(2). https://doi.org/10.1590/s0066-782x2003001000006

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free