Role of HEART score in prediction of coronary artery disease and major adverse cardiac events in patients presenting with chest pain-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Role of HEART score in prediction of coronary artery disease and major adverse cardiac events in patients presenting with chest pain

Published:2022 Issue:3-4 Volume:150 Page:149-155
ISSN:0370-8179
Container-title:Srpski arhiv za celokupno lekarstvo
language:en
Short-container-title:Srp Arh Celok Lek

Author:

Stojkovic Tanja¹,Stojkovic Eva¹,Sakac Dejan²^ORCID,Redzek Aleksandar²,Stojsic-Milosavljevic Anastazija²,Velicki Lazar²^ORCID,Parapid Biljana³^ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Novi Sad Primary Healthcare Center, Novi Sad, Serbia

2. University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia + Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases of Vojvodina, Sremska Kamenica, Serbia

3. University of Belgrade, Faculty of Medicine, Belgrade, Serbia + University Clinical Centre of Serbia, Division of Cardiology, Belgrade, Serbia

Abstract

Introduction. Chest pain (CP) diagnostics accuracy remains debatable for both general practitioners (GP) or emergency department (ED) physicians for patients in HEART score (HS) low- and intermediate-risk groups which prompted us to review our electronic database for all patients admitted via our center?s ED during 2014 to 2020 for CP and suspect acute coronary syndrome. Methods. Patients were divided in function of low- or intermediate-risk HS and assessed during a three month follow up for angiogram results, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), lab results and echo parameters. Results. Of 585 patients included, low-risk HS group (21,4%, 36% were women) had significant coronary disease on angiogram in 68%, while for intermediate-risk HS group (78.6%, with 32.6% women) it was for 18.4% of patients (p < 0,0005). Area under the ROC curve of HS in detecting patients with ischemic heart disease as a cause of CP was 0.771 (95% CI: 0.772?0.820) with best cut-off point HS was calculated at 3.5. Sensitivity and specificity were 89.2% and 57.6% respectively. Adjusting for sex, lab results and HS, AUROC curve of this model was 0.828 (95% CI: 0.786?0.869; p < 0,0005) with cut-off of 77.95. Sensitivity and specificity were 84.9% and 68% respectively. In the three-month follow-up post-discharge, there was a significant difference in MACE between groups (low- vs. intermediate-risk HS was 3.4 vs. 16.7% p < 0.05). Conclusion. HS for our CP patients admitted via our ED by GP and ED physicians? referral, provides a quick and reliable prediction of ischemic heart disease and MACE.

Publisher

National Library of Serbia

Subject

General Medicine

Reference30 articles.

1. Gulati M, Levy PD, Mukherjee D, Amsterdam E, Bhatt DL, Birtcher KK, et al. 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. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2022;16(1):54-122.

2. Sagel D, Vlaar PJ, van Roosmalen R, Waardenburg I, Nieuwland W, Lettinga R, et al. Prehospital risk stratification in patients with chest pain. Emerg Med J. 2021;38(11):814-9.

3. Reinhardt SW, Lin CJ, Novak E, Brown DL. Noninvasive Cardiac Testing vs Clinical Evaluation Alone in Acute Chest Pain: A Secondary Analysis of the ROMICAT-II Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178(2):212-9.

4. Bylund WE, Cole PM, Lloyd ML, Mercer AA, Osit AK, Hussain SW, et al. Effect of Implementation of HEART Chest Pain Protocol on Emergency Department Disposition, Testing and Cost. West J Emerg Med. 2021;22(2):308-18.

5. Spiegel R, Sutherland M, Brown R, Honasoge A, Witting M. Clinically relevant adverse cardiovascular events in intermediate heart score patients admitted to the hospital following a negative emergency department evaluation. Am J Emerg Med. 2021;46:469-75.