Feasibility and safety of evaluating patients with prior coronary artery disease using an accelerated diagnostic algorithm in a chest pain unit

0Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

An accelerated diagnostic protocol for evaluating low-risk patients with acute chest pain in a cardiologist-based chest pain unit (CPU) is widely employed today. However, limited data exist regarding the feasibility of such an algorithm for patients with a history of prior coronary artery disease (CAD). The aim of the current study was to assess the feasibility and safety of evaluating patients with a history of prior CAD using an accelerated diagnostic protocol. We evaluated 1,220 consecutive patients presenting with acute chest pain and hospitalized in our CPU. Patients were stratified according to whether they had a history of prior CAD or not. The primary composite outcome was defined as a composite of readmission due to chest pain, acute coronary syndrome, coronary revascularization, or death during a 60-day follow-up period. Overall, 268 (22%) patients had a history of prior CAD. Noninvasive evaluation was performed in 1,112 (91%) patients. While patients with a history of prior CAD had more comorbidities, the two study groups were similar regarding hospitalization rates (9% vs. 13%, p = 0.08), coronary angiography (13% vs. 11%, p = 0.41), and revascularization (6.5% vs. 5.7%, p = 0.8) performed during CPU evaluation. At 60-days the primary endpoint was observed in 12 (1.6%) and 6 (3.2%) patients without and with a history of prior CAD, respectively (p = 0.836). No mortalities were recorded. To conclude, Patients with a history of prior CAD can be expeditiously and safely evaluated using an accelerated diagnostic protocol in a CPU with outcomes not differing from patients without such a history.

Figures

  • Table 1. Baseline characteristics of the study cohort.
  • Table 2. Outcomes of patients during the observation period in the chest pain unit.
  • Fig 1. Patient evaluation flow chart. * Patients with a negative evaluation were discharged. # Positive evaluation includes: hospitalization during the observation period in the chest pain unit and patients with a positive noninvasive tests who were hospitalized for further investigation. CAD, Coronary artery disease; CPU, Chest pain unit
  • Fig 2. Distribution of imaging tests between the study groups. MPS, Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy; MDCT, Multidetector computed tomography; Echo, Stress echocardiography; CAD, Coronary artery disease.
  • Table 3. Outcomes of patients who underwent non-invasive evaluation in the chest pain unit.
  • Table 4. Outcome of patients at 60-day follow-up.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Beigel, R., Fardman, A., Goldkorn, R., Goitein, O., Ben-Zekery, S., Shlomo, N., … Matetzky, S. (2016). Feasibility and safety of evaluating patients with prior coronary artery disease using an accelerated diagnostic algorithm in a chest pain unit. PLoS ONE, 11(9). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163501

Readers over time

‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘2501234

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

Lecturer / Post doc 2

67%

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 1

33%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 3

60%

Nursing and Health Professions 1

20%

Neuroscience 1

20%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0