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

BACKGROUND: 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.

Baseline NT-ProBNP level predicts success of cardioversion of atrial fibrillation with flecainide.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute-onset symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) can be treated with flecainide. However, flecainide may induce arrhythmias and/or exaggerate heart failure. Therefore, validated markers to predict the efficacy of flecainide and prevent adverse effects are required. We hypothesised that lower NT-proBNP plasma levels correlate with higher success rates of cardioversion with flecainide in patients with AF. METHODS: In this prospective single-centre study, we included 112 subsequent patients with acute-onset (< 24 h) symptomatic AF. Patients with symptoms of heart failure and ECG signs of ischaemia were excluded. Baseline laboratory measurements, including NT-proBNP, were done. Echocardiograms were performed ~ 2 weeks after restoration of SR. RESULTS: Cardioversion with flecainide was successful in 91 patients (87 %). NT-proBNP was lower in patients with successful cardioversion (P < 0.001). Logistic regression indicated NT-proBNP as an independent predictor of successful cardioversion. A cut-off NT-proBNP value of 1550 pg/ml provided optimal test accuracy to predict successful cardioversion. CONCLUSION: In patients with < 24 h of symptomatic AF, NT-proBNP levels up to 1550 pg/ml correlate with high success rates (94 %) of cardioversion with flecainide. Conversely, NT-proBNP higher than 1550 pg/ml correlates with poor success rates (36 %). Further research is needed to validate the predictive value of NT-proBNP for successful cardioversion with flecainide.

The predictive value of the exercise ECG for major adverse cardiac events in patients who presented with chest pain in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: To improve early diagnostic and therapeutic decision making, we designed the HEART score for chest pain patients in the emergency department (ED). HEART is an acronym of its components: History, ECG, Age, Risk factors and Troponin. Currently, many chest pain patients undergo exercise testing on the consecutive days after presentation. However, it may be questioned how much diagnostic value the exercise ECG adds when the HEART score is already known. METHODS: A subanalysis was performed of a multicenter prospective validation study of the HEART score, consisting of 248 patients who underwent exercise testing within 7 days after presentation in the ED. Outcome is the predictive value of exercise testing in terms of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 6 weeks after presentation. RESULTS: In low-risk patients (HEART score ≤ 3), 63.1 % were negative tests, 28.6 % non-conclusive and 8.3 % positive; the latter were all false positives. In the intermediate-risk group (HEART score 4-6), 30.9 % were negative tests, 60.3 % non-conclusive and 8.8 % positive, half of these positives were false positives. In the high-risk patients (HEART score ≥ 7), 14.3 % were negative tests, 57.1 % non-conclusive and 28.6 % positive, of which half were false positives. CONCLUSION: In a chest pain population risk stratified with HEART, exercise testing has only a modest contribution to clinical decision making. 50 % of all tests are non-conclusive, with high rates of false positive tests in all three risk groups. In intermediate-risk patients, negative exercise tests may contribute to the exclusion of disease. Clinicians should rather go for sensitive tests, in particular in patients with low HEART scores.