4 research outputs found

    Pathofysiology and clinical aspects of coronary stenting

    No full text

    Application of European Society of Cardiology guidelines for evaluating acute coronary syndrome risk in low-risk patients with cocaine-associated chest pain: Findings from the RISK study – An observational analysis

    No full text
    Background: Cocaine was the drug of choice in 4.7 % of all recreational drug-related emergency department visits. Of these patients, 40 % present with cocaine-associated chest pain, of whom 4.7 % develop an acute coronary syndrome. The American Heart Association recommends a 12-hour observation period for these patients. Objective: This study primarily aimed to ascertain whether the European Society of Cardiology non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction guidelines can be safely applied to rule-out acute coronary syndrome in low-risk patients with cocaine-associated chest pain. Methods: For this prospective observational cohort study, patients, aged 18–45 years old, who presented with cocaine-associated chest pain and were risk stratified as low risk according to the European Society of Cardiology non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction guidelines and therefore discharged home without prolonged observation period, were included. They were followed to assess major adverse cardiac events four weeks after presentation to the emergency department or chest pain unit. Cocaine use was confirmed with urine toxicology screening. Results: A total of 107 patients were included and analysed. The accuracy of the self-reported history of recent cocaine use was 94 %. Post-discharge cocaine use persisted among 32 % of patients. None of the included 107 patients died and major adverse cardiac event within four weeks did not occur among 97 patients with available data regarding MACE. Conclusion: Ruling out an acute coronary syndrome using the European Society of Cardiology non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction guidelines is likely to be safe for patients with cocaine-associated chest pain, however this study was underpowered to reach definitive conclusions

    Effect of Using the HEART Score in Patients With Chest Pain in the Emergency Department: A Stepped-Wedge, Cluster Randomized Trial

    No full text
    Item does not contain fulltextBackground: The HEART (History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk factors, and initial Troponin) score is an easy-to-apply instrument to stratify patients with chest pain according to their short-term risk for major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), but its effect on daily practice is unknown. Objective: To measure the effect of use of the HEART score on patient outcomes and use of health care resources. Design: Stepped-wedge, cluster randomized trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01756846). Setting: Emergency departments in 9 Dutch hospitals. Patients: Unselected patients with chest pain presenting at emergency departments in 2013 and 2014. Intervention: All hospitals started with usual care. Every 6 weeks, 1 hospital was randomly assigned to switch to "HEART care," during which physicians calculated the HEART score to guide patient management. Measurements: For safety, a noninferiority margin of a 3.0% absolute increase in MACEs within 6 weeks was set. Other outcomes included use of health care resources, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Results: A total of 3648 patients were included (1827 receiving usual care and 1821 receiving HEART care). Six-week incidence of MACEs during HEART care was 1.3% lower than during usual care (upper limit of the 1-sided 95% CI, 2.1% [within the noninferiority margin of 3.0%]). In low-risk patients, incidence of MACEs was 2.0% (95% CI, 1.2% to 3.3%). No statistically significant differences in early discharge, readmissions, recurrent emergency department visits, outpatient visits, or visits to general practitioners were observed. Limitation: Physicians were hesitant to refrain from admission and diagnostic tests in patients classified as low risk by the HEART score. Conclusion: Using the HEART score during initial assessment of patients with chest pain is safe, but the effect on health care resources is limited, possibly due to nonadherence to management recommendations. Primary Funding Source: Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development
    corecore