Cargando…

Which diagnostic tests are most useful in a chest pain unit protocol?

BACKGROUND: The chest pain unit (CPU) provides rapid diagnostic assessment for patients with acute, undifferentiated chest pain, using a combination of electrocardiographic (ECG) recording, biochemical markers and provocative cardiac testing. We aimed to identify which elements of a CPU protocol wer...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Goodacre, Steve, Locker, Thomas, Arnold, Jane, Angelini, Karen, Morris, Francis
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2005
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1201136/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16122380
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-227X-5-6
_version_ 1782124889965068288
author Goodacre, Steve
Locker, Thomas
Arnold, Jane
Angelini, Karen
Morris, Francis
author_facet Goodacre, Steve
Locker, Thomas
Arnold, Jane
Angelini, Karen
Morris, Francis
author_sort Goodacre, Steve
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The chest pain unit (CPU) provides rapid diagnostic assessment for patients with acute, undifferentiated chest pain, using a combination of electrocardiographic (ECG) recording, biochemical markers and provocative cardiac testing. We aimed to identify which elements of a CPU protocol were most diagnostically and prognostically useful. METHODS: The Northern General Hospital CPU uses 2–6 hours of serial ECG / ST segment monitoring, CK-MB(mass) on arrival and at least two hours later, troponin T at least six hours after worst pain and exercise treadmill testing. Data were prospectively collected over an eighteen-month period from patients managed on the CPU. Patients discharged after CPU assessment were invited to attend a follow-up appointment 72 hours later for ECG and troponin T measurement. Hospital records of all patients were reviewed to identify adverse cardiac events over the subsequent six months. Diagnostic accuracy of each test was estimated by calculating sensitivity and specificity for: 1) acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with clinical myocardial infarction and 2) ACS with myocyte necrosis. Prognostic value was estimated by calculating the relative risk of an adverse cardiac event following a positive result. RESULTS: Of the 706 patients, 30 (4.2%) were diagnosed as ACS with myocardial infarction, 30 (4.2%) as ACS with myocyte necrosis, and 32 (4.5%) suffered an adverse cardiac event. Sensitivities for ACS with myocardial infarction and myocyte necrosis respectively were: serial ECG / ST segment monitoring 33% and 23%; CK-MB(mass) 96% and 63%; troponin T (using 0.03 ng/ml threshold) 96% and 90%. The only test that added useful prognostic information was exercise treadmill testing (relative risk 6 for cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or arrhythmia over six months). CONCLUSION: Serial ECG / ST monitoring, as used in our protocol, adds little diagnostic or prognostic value in patients with a normal or non-diagnostic initial ECG. CK-MB(mass) can rule out ACS with clinical myocardial infarction but not myocyte necrosis(defined as a troponin elevation without myocardial infarction). Using a low threshold for positivity for troponin T improves sensitivity of this test for myocardial infarction and myocardial necrosis. Exercise treadmill testing predicts subsequent adverse cardiac events.
format Text
id pubmed-1201136
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2005
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-12011362005-09-10 Which diagnostic tests are most useful in a chest pain unit protocol? Goodacre, Steve Locker, Thomas Arnold, Jane Angelini, Karen Morris, Francis BMC Emerg Med Research Article BACKGROUND: The chest pain unit (CPU) provides rapid diagnostic assessment for patients with acute, undifferentiated chest pain, using a combination of electrocardiographic (ECG) recording, biochemical markers and provocative cardiac testing. We aimed to identify which elements of a CPU protocol were most diagnostically and prognostically useful. METHODS: The Northern General Hospital CPU uses 2–6 hours of serial ECG / ST segment monitoring, CK-MB(mass) on arrival and at least two hours later, troponin T at least six hours after worst pain and exercise treadmill testing. Data were prospectively collected over an eighteen-month period from patients managed on the CPU. Patients discharged after CPU assessment were invited to attend a follow-up appointment 72 hours later for ECG and troponin T measurement. Hospital records of all patients were reviewed to identify adverse cardiac events over the subsequent six months. Diagnostic accuracy of each test was estimated by calculating sensitivity and specificity for: 1) acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with clinical myocardial infarction and 2) ACS with myocyte necrosis. Prognostic value was estimated by calculating the relative risk of an adverse cardiac event following a positive result. RESULTS: Of the 706 patients, 30 (4.2%) were diagnosed as ACS with myocardial infarction, 30 (4.2%) as ACS with myocyte necrosis, and 32 (4.5%) suffered an adverse cardiac event. Sensitivities for ACS with myocardial infarction and myocyte necrosis respectively were: serial ECG / ST segment monitoring 33% and 23%; CK-MB(mass) 96% and 63%; troponin T (using 0.03 ng/ml threshold) 96% and 90%. The only test that added useful prognostic information was exercise treadmill testing (relative risk 6 for cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or arrhythmia over six months). CONCLUSION: Serial ECG / ST monitoring, as used in our protocol, adds little diagnostic or prognostic value in patients with a normal or non-diagnostic initial ECG. CK-MB(mass) can rule out ACS with clinical myocardial infarction but not myocyte necrosis(defined as a troponin elevation without myocardial infarction). Using a low threshold for positivity for troponin T improves sensitivity of this test for myocardial infarction and myocardial necrosis. Exercise treadmill testing predicts subsequent adverse cardiac events. BioMed Central 2005-08-25 /pmc/articles/PMC1201136/ /pubmed/16122380 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-227X-5-6 Text en Copyright © 2005 Goodacre et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Goodacre, Steve
Locker, Thomas
Arnold, Jane
Angelini, Karen
Morris, Francis
Which diagnostic tests are most useful in a chest pain unit protocol?
title Which diagnostic tests are most useful in a chest pain unit protocol?
title_full Which diagnostic tests are most useful in a chest pain unit protocol?
title_fullStr Which diagnostic tests are most useful in a chest pain unit protocol?
title_full_unstemmed Which diagnostic tests are most useful in a chest pain unit protocol?
title_short Which diagnostic tests are most useful in a chest pain unit protocol?
title_sort which diagnostic tests are most useful in a chest pain unit protocol?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1201136/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16122380
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-227X-5-6
work_keys_str_mv AT goodacresteve whichdiagnostictestsaremostusefulinachestpainunitprotocol
AT lockerthomas whichdiagnostictestsaremostusefulinachestpainunitprotocol
AT arnoldjane whichdiagnostictestsaremostusefulinachestpainunitprotocol
AT angelinikaren whichdiagnostictestsaremostusefulinachestpainunitprotocol
AT morrisfrancis whichdiagnostictestsaremostusefulinachestpainunitprotocol