The HEART score as a prognostic tool for revascularization.

The History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk Factors, Troponin (HEART) score is a useful tool in the Emergency Department setting to identify those patients safe for outpatient evaluation of chest pain. Its utility for predicting cardiac interventions is unclear. Our objective was to evaluate the prognostic accuracy of the HEART score to predict the need for cardiac stent or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We conducted a retrospective chart review of 625 consecutive subjects with chest pain presenting to an Emergency Department (ED) with a HEART pathway protocol in place. We also reviewed each subject's record for evidence of major adverse cardiac events within 6 weeks following their ED visit. We double-abstracted 10% of the charts for quality assurance. We included subjects if they were ≥ 18 at the time of presentation and had a chief complaint of chest pain. We excluded subjects if they did not have an electrocardiogram or troponin, or if their chart lacked sufficient information to calculate the history portion of their HEART score. Of 625 charts, 449 subjects met criteria for study inclusion. The area under the receiver operator curve reported as c-statistics was 0.877 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.806-0.949] for the HEART score's ability to predict cardiac stent and 0.921 (95% CI 0.858-0.984) for CABG. There is a strong association between increasing HEART scores and the need for revascularization which may provide emergency physicians justification for expedited cardiology consultation and admission for these patients. These findings require further prospective validation.

An external validation of the HEART pathway among Emergency Department patients with chest pain.

The impact of an outpatient disposition strategy for patients with HEART score 0-3 (HEART pathway) on HEART score prognostic accuracy is unclear. Our objective is to perform an external validation the HEART score in the setting of recent implementation of the HEART pathway. We conducted an external validation study of the HEART pathway among patients presenting to our ED with chest pain 6 weeks after institutional implementation of a HEART pathway outpatient disposition pathway. We reviewed the charts of 625 consecutive patients with chest pain. Data abstracted included all elements of the HEART score to include history, electrocardiogram (ECG) read, patient age, patient risk factors, and troponin levels. We also reviewed each patient's record for evidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) to include mortality, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization over 6 weeks following their initial ED visit. We double-abstracted 10% of the charts for quality assurance purposes. Of 625 charts, 449 patients met all criteria for study inclusion. Of these, 25 subjects (5.56%) experience 6-week MACE. No subject with a score of 3 or less has a MACE at 6 weeks (100% sensitivity, 38.7% specificity). The area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) is 0.898 (95% confidence interval 0.847-0.950). Kappa coefficients for inter-rater reliability range from 0.62 for the history component of the HEART score to 1.0 for troponin. A low HEART score (0-3) maintains excellent sensitivity for predicting 6-week MACE in the setting of an outpatient disposition pathway for these patients.

A retrospective external validation study of the HEART score among patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain.

Emergency physicians must be able to effectively prognosticate outcomes for patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) with chest pain. The HEART score offers a prognostication tool, but external validation studies are limited. We conducted an external retrospective validation study of the HEART score among ED patients presenting to our ED with chest pain from 1 January 2014 to 9 June 2014. We utilized chart review methodology to abstract data from each patient's electronic medical record. We collected data relevant to each of the five elements of the HEART score: history, electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation, patient age, patient risk factors, and troponin levels. We calculated the diagnostic accuracy of the HEART score (0-10) for predicting the primary outcome of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) over 6 weeks following the ED visit (coronary revascularization, myocardial infarction, or mortality). We randomly selected 10% of patient charts from which a second investigator abstracted all data to assess inter-rater reliability for all study variables. Of 625 charts reviewed, we abstracted data on 417 (66.7%) consecutive patients meeting study inclusion criteria. Thirty-one (7.4%) of these patients experienced 6-week MACE. We observed no instances of MACE within 6 weeks among subjects with a HEART score of 3 or less. The area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) is 0.885 (95% confidence interval 0.838-0.931). Patients with a HEART score ≤3 are at low risk for 6-week MACE. Hence, these patients may be candidates for outpatient follow-up instead of inpatient admission for cardiac risk stratification.

Prevalence of thoracic spine lesions masquerading as cauda equina syndrome: yield of a novel magnetic resonance imaging protocol.

Our objective was to describe the yield of actionable thoracic spine lesions for a novel magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol including evaluation of the thoracic spine among patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) with symptoms consistent with epidural compression syndrome. Our ED and Department of Radiology together designed a novel rapid MRI protocol entailing 3D volumetric T2 weighted sequences through both the thoracic and lumbar spine obtained in the sagittal plane to assess for both lumbar and thoracic spine lesions. We recorded study outcomes for all patients undergoing this protocol or conventional lumbar MRI during May 2014-May 2015 to determine the prevalence of actionable thoracic spine lesions. We defined an actionable thoracic lesion as any pathology requiring treatment (e.g., medication, admission, surgery) not otherwise indicated on the basis of lumbar spine findings. During the study period, 112 of 124 (90.3%) of ED patients undergoing MRI evaluation for epidural compression syndrome underwent the novel protocol. The remaining patients underwent evaluation of the lumbar spine using only a conventional MRI protocol. Of the 112 patients undergoing the novel protocol, 6 (5.4%) patients had thoracic spine lesions indicating therapy not otherwise indicated by lumbar spine findings. The etiologies of these six lesions were: neoplasms (2), de-myelination (2), compression fracture (1), and degeneration due to pernicious anemia (1). Emergency providers should strongly consider the routine use of MRI protocols including thoracic spine evaluation in patients presenting to the ED with symptoms consistent with epidural compression syndrome.