HEART score performance in Asian and Caucasian patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The HEART score is a simple and effective tool to predict short-term major adverse cardiovascular events in patients suspected of acute coronary syndrome. Patients are assigned to three risk categories using History, ECG, Age, Risk factors and Troponin (HEART). The purpose is early rule out and discharge is considered safe for patients in the low risk category. Its performance in patients of Asian ethnicity is unknown. We evaluated the performance of the HEART score in patients of Caucasian, Chinese, Indian and Malay ethnicity. METHODS: The HEART score was assessed retrospectively in 3456 patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected acute coronary syndrome (1791 Caucasians, 1059 Chinese, 344 Indians, 262 Malays), assigning them into three risk categories. RESULTS: The incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events within six weeks after presentation was similar between the ethnic groups. A smaller proportion of Caucasians was in the low risk category compared with Asians (Caucasians 35.8%, Chinese 43.5%, Indians 45.3%, Malays 44.7%, p<0.001). The negative predictive value of a low HEART score was comparable across the ethnic groups, but lower than previously reported (Caucasians 95.3%, Chinese 95.0%, Indians 96.2%, Malays 96.6%). Also the c-statistic for the HEART score was not significantly different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that the overall performance of the HEART score is equal among Caucasian and Asian ethnic groups. The event rate in the low risk group, however, was higher than reported in previous studies, which queries the safety of early discharge of patients in the low risk category.

Ethnic differences in clinical outcome of patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain.

BACKGROUND: Ethnicity, although known to influence cardiovascular outcome in assorted clinical settings, has not been investigated previously as a risk factor in patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected acute myocardial infarction. METHODS: In this multi-ethnic cohort study conducted in Singapore and The Netherlands, 2784 patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain were enrolled (788 Caucasians, 1281 Chinese, 404 Indians and 311 Malays) and were followed up for 1 year. RESULTS: Although Caucasian patients on average were older and had incurred more cardiovascular adverse events, the Asian ethnic groups carried a greater burden of cardiovascular risk factors. Caucasian and Malay patients were most frequently diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction (Caucasians 11.2%, Chinese and Indians 6.4%, Malays 10.6%, P<0.001), also after correction for baseline differences. Chinese and Indian patients, however, more often had unstable angina. Asian patients had strikingly more extensive coronary artery disease than Caucasian patients (triple-vessel disease: Caucasians 6.5%, Chinese 22.8%, Indians 32.4%, Malays 32.8%, P<0.001) and Chinese patients with myocardial infarction more frequently underwent coronary revascularisation compared with Caucasian patients (Caucasians 41.4%, Chinese 67.5%, Indians 62.5%, Malay 46.7%, P=0.005). Ethnicity was not an independent predictor of major adverse cardiovascular events during 1-year follow-up in all chest pain patients. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of myocardial infarction and unstable angina, revascularisation rate and extent of coronary artery disease differ significantly among chest pain patients of different ethnic groups. These findings have important clinical implications and support consideration of ethnicity in risk stratification and determination of the patient management strategy in patients with symptoms suggestive of myocardial infarction.