American Society of Anesthesiologists' Status Association With Cost and Length of Stay in Lumbar Laminectomy and Fusion: Results From an Institutional Database.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to characterize the costs associated with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, and to determine the extent to which ASA status is a predictor of increased cost and LOS following lumbar laminectomy and fusion (LLF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spinal fusion accounts for the highest hospital costs of any surgical procedure performed in the United States, and ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) status is a known risk factor for cost and length of stay (LOS) in the orthopedic literature. There is a paucity of literature that directly addresses the influence of ASA status on cost and LOS following LLF. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of an institutional database of patients undergoing single-level LLF at an academic tertiary care facility from 2006 to 2016. Univariate comparisons were made using χ tests for categorical variables and t tests for continuous variables. Multivariate linear regression was utilized to estimate regression coefficients, and to determine whether ASA status is an independent risk factor for cost and LOS. RESULTS: A total of 1849 patients met inclusion criteria. For every one-point increase in ASA score, intensive care unit (ICU) LOS increased by 0.518 days (P < 0.001), and hospital length of stay increased by 1.93 days (P < 0.001). For every one-point increase in ASA score, direct cost increased by $7474.62 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: ASA status is a predictor of hospital LOS, ICU LOS, and direct cost. Consideration of the ways in which ASA status contributes to increased cost and prolonged LOS can allow for more accurate reimbursement adjustment and more precise targeting of efficiency and cost effectiveness initiatives. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Prospective evaluation of a new protocol for the provisional use of perfusion imaging with exercise stress testing.

PURPOSE: Previous literature suggests that myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) adds little to the prognosis of patients who exercise >10 metabolic equivalents (METs) during stress testing. With this in mind, we prospectively tested a provisional injection protocol in emergency department (ED) patients presenting for the evaluation of chest pain in which a patient would not receive an injection of radioisotope if adequate exercise was achieved without symptoms and a negative ECG response. METHODS: All patients who presented to the ED over a 5-year period who were referred for stress testing as part of their ED evaluation were included. Patients considered for a provisional protocol were: exercise stress, age <65 years, no known coronary artery disease, and an interpretable rest ECG. Criteria for not injecting included a maximal predicted heart rate ≥85%, ≥10 METs of exercise, no anginal symptoms during stress, and no ECG changes. Groups were compared based on stress test results, all-cause and cardiac mortality, follow-up cardiac testing, subsequent revascularization, and cost. RESULTS: A total of 965 patients were eligible with 192 undergoing exercise-only and 773 having perfusion imaging. After 41.6 ± 19.6 months of follow-up, all-cause mortality was similar in the exercise-only versus the exercise plus imaging group (2.6% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.59). There were no cardiac deaths in the exercise-only group. At 1 year there was no difference in the number of repeat functional stress tests (1.6% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.43), fewer angiograms (0% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.002), and a significantly lower cost ($65 ± $332 vs $506 ± $1,991, p = 0.002; values are in US dollars) in the exercise-only group. The radiation exposure in the exercise plus imaging group was 8.4 ± 2.1 mSv. CONCLUSIONS: A provisional injection protocol has a very low mortality, few follow-up diagnostic tests, and lower cost compared to standard imaging protocols. If adopted it would decrease radiation exposure, save time and decrease health-care costs without jeopardizing prognosis.

A simple scoring tool for the evaluation of patients in an emergency department chest pain unit.

BACKGROUND: There are multiple risk scores to determine the prognosis of high-risk patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) to emergency departments (ED) and chest pain units (CPU), however, there are few options for patients without ACS (no diagnostic ST-segment deviation or positive biomarkers). OBJECTIVES: To derive a clinical risk score for the management of lower-risk patients seen in ED CPUs. METHODS: We evaluated all patients triaged through the Mount Sinai ED CPU over a 76-month period who underwent stress testing after negative serial biomarkers and ECGs. Primary and secondary endpoints of hospital admission and coronary revascularization were retrospectively obtained. Variables associated with admission at P < 0.1 level were entered into a multivariable model. Each variable was assigned an integer score based on the beta coefficients in the final model. RESULTS: A total of 4,666 patients were evaluated and 738 (15.8%) had an abnormal stress test, 575 (12.3%) were admitted to the hospital, and 133 (2.9%) underwent coronary revascularization. A score consisting of age > 55 years, gender, chest pain quality (typical vs atypical), known coronary artery disease, shortness of breath, diabetes, smoking, and abnormal ECG demonstrated strong correlation between observed vs predicted hospital admission. The clinical score showed good ability to predict admission with a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area of 0.72, which improved to 0.81 when the results of stress testing were added. CONCLUSIONS: This new clinical risk score is simple to use, predicts a clinically relevant outcome to ED physicians, and the results of noninvasive testing are additive.

A comparison of coronary CTA and stress testing using high-efficiency SPECT MPI for the evaluation of chest pain in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have compared CTA to stress testing and MPI using older Na-I SPECT cameras and traditional rest-stress protocols, but are limited by often using optimized CTA protocols but suboptimal MPI methodology. We compared CTA to stress testing with modern SPECT MPI using high-efficiency CZT cameras and stress-first protocols in an ED population. METHODS: In a retrospective, non-randomized study, all patients who underwent CTA or stress testing (ETT or Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT MPI) as part of their ED assessment in 2010-2011 driven by ED attending preference and equipment availability were evaluated for their disposition from the ED (admission vs discharge, length of time to disposition), subsequent visits to the ED and diagnostic testing (within 3 months), and radiation exposure. CTA was performed using a 64-slice scanner (GE Lightspeed VCT) and MPI was performed using a CZT SPECT camera (GE Discovery 530c). Data were obtained from prospectively acquired electronic medical records and effective doses were calculated from published conversion factors. A propensity-matched analysis was also used to compare outcomes in the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 1,458 patients underwent testing in the ED with 192 CTAs and 1,266 stress tests (327 ETTs and 939 MPIs). The CTA patients were a lower-risk cohort based on age, risk factors, and known heart disease. A statistically similar proportion of patients was discharged directly from the ED in the stress testing group (82% vs 73%, P = .27), but their time to disposition was longer (11.0 ± 5 vs 20.5 ± 7 hours, P < .0001). There was no significant difference in cardiac return visits to the ED (5.7% CTA vs 4.3% stress testing, P = .50), but more patients had follow-up studies in the CTA cohort compared to stress testing (14% vs 7%, P = .001). The mean effective dose of 12.6 ± 8.6 mSv for the CTA group was higher (P < .0001) than 5.0 ± 4.1 mSv for the stress testing group (ETT and MPI). A propensity score-matched cohort showed similar results to the entire cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Stress testing with ETT, high-efficiency SPECT MPI, and stress-only protocols had a significantly lower patient radiation dose and less follow-up diagnostic testing than CTA with similar cardiac return visits. CTA had a shorter time to disposition, but there was a trend toward more revascularization than with stress testing.

Yield of routine provocative cardiac testing among patients in an emergency department-based chest pain unit.

IMPORTANCE: The American Heart Association recommends routine provocative cardiac testing in accelerated diagnostic protocols for coronary ischemia. The diagnostic and therapeutic yield of this approach are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the yield of routine provocative cardiac testing in an emergency department-based chest pain unit. DESIGN AND SETTING: We examined a prospectively collected database of patients evaluated for possible acute coronary syndrome between March 4, 2004, and May 15, 2010, in the emergency department-based chest pain unit of an urban academic tertiary care center. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with signs or symptoms of possible acute coronary syndrome and without an ischemic electrocardiography result or a positive biomarker were enrolled in the database. EXPOSURES: All patients were evaluated by exercise stress testing or myocardial perfusion imaging. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Demographic and clinical features, results of routine provocative cardiac testing and angiography, and therapeutic interventions were recorded. Diagnostic yield (true-positive rate) was calculated, and the potential therapeutic yield of invasive therapy was assessed through blinded, structured medical record review using American Heart Association designations (class I, IIa, IIb, or lower) for the potential benefit from percutaneous intervention. RESULTS: In total, 4181 patients were enrolled in the study. Chest pain was initially reported in 93.5%, most (73.2%) were at intermediate risk for coronary artery disease, and 37.6% were male. Routine provocative cardiac testing was positive for coronary ischemia in 470 (11.2%), of whom 123 underwent coronary angiography. Obstructive disease was confirmed in 63 of 123 (51.2% true positive), and 28 (0.7% overall) had findings consistent with the potential benefit from revascularization (American Heart Association class I or IIa). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In an emergency department-based chest pain unit, routine provocative cardiac testing generated a small therapeutic yield, new diagnoses of coronary artery disease were uncommon, and false-positive results were common.

Biomarkers after risk stratification in acute chest pain (from the BRIC Study).

Current models incompletely risk-stratify patients with acute chest pain. In this study, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and cystatin C were incorporated into a contemporary chest pain triage algorithm in a clinically stratified population to improve acute coronary syndrome discrimination. Adult patients with chest pain presenting without myocardial infarction (n = 382) were prospectively enrolled from 2008 to 2009. After clinical risk stratification, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and cystatin C were measured and standard care was performed. The primary end point was the result of a clinical stress test. The secondary end point was any major adverse cardiac event at 6 months. Associations were determined through multivariate stratified analyses. In the low-risk group, 76 of 78 patients with normal levels of the 2 biomarkers had normal stress test results (negative predictive value 97%). Normal biomarkers predicted normal stress test results with an odds ratio of 10.56 (p = 0.006). In contrast, 26 of 33 intermediate-risk patients with normal levels of the 2 biomarkers had normal stress test results (negative predictive value 79%). Biomarkers and stress test results were not associated in the intermediate-risk group (odds ratio 2.48, p = 0.09). There were 42 major adverse cardiac events in the overall cohort. No major adverse cardiac events occurred at 6 months in the low-risk subgroup that underwent stress testing. In conclusion, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and cystatin C levels predict the results of stress tests in low-risk patients with chest pain but should not be substituted for stress testing in intermediate-risk patients. There is potential for their use in the early discharge of low-risk patients after clinical risk stratification.

Screening, evaluation, and early management of acute aortic dissection in the ED.

Acute aortic dissection (AAD) is a rare and lethal disease with presenting signs and symptoms that can often be seen with other high risk conditions; diagnosis is therefore often delayed or missed. Pain is present in up to 90% of cases and is typically severe at onset. Many patients present with acute on chronic hypertension, but hypotension is an ominous sign, often reflecting hemorrhage or cardiac tamponade. The chest x-ray can be normal in 10-20% of patients with AAD, and though transthoracic echocardiography is useful if suggestive findings are seen, and should be used to identify pericardial effusion, TTE cannot be used to exclude AAD. Transesophageal echocardiography, however, reliably confirms or excludes the diagnosis, where such equipment and expertise is available. CT scan with IV contrast is the most common imaging modality used to diagnose and classify AAD, and MRI can be used in patients in whom the use of CT or IV contrast is undesirable. Recent specialty guidelines have helped define high-risk features and a diagnostic pathway that can be used the emergency department setting. Initial management of diagnosed or highly suspected acute aortic dissection focuses on pain control, heart rate and then blood pressure management, and immediate surgical consultation.

Stress-only Tc-99m myocardial perfusion imaging in an emergency department chest pain unit.

BACKGROUND: Stress-only myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) saves time by eliminating rest imaging, which is important for emergency department (ED) throughput but has not been studied in an ED population. STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the prognosis of a normal stress-only MPI study compared to a normal rest-stress MPI and establish its effectiveness in an ED setting. METHODS: All patients evaluated in the ED over 6.5 years who underwent a stress-only technetium-99m gated MPI were compared to those who had a rest-stress study. All-cause mortality was determined using the Social Security Death Index. Survival was analyzed in patients with normal and abnormal MPI results. RESULTS: A total of 4145 studies (2340 stress-only, 1805 rest-stress) were performed. Patients' average age was 57.9 years, 38.5% were male, and most had an intermediate or low pretest risk of coronary artery disease (87.7%). Average follow-up was 35.9 ± 20.9 months. In patients with normal perfusion, at 1 year of follow-up there were 11 deaths in the stress-only group (0.5% 1-year mortality), and 13 deaths in the rest-stress cohort (1.1% 1-year mortality). At the end of follow-up, the stress-only group had a lower all-cause mortality (p < 0.0001) and similar risk adjusted all-cause mortality (p = 0.10) than the rest-stress cohort. Patients with abnormal perfusion demonstrated the expected differential prognosis based on total perfusion deficits in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: A normal stress-only MPI study has a benign 1-year prognosis similar to a rest-stress study when performed in the ED. The ability to triage patients more rapidly and reduce radiation exposure represents an attractive alternative for low-risk patients.

Sensitivity of the aortic dissection detection risk score, a novel guideline-based tool for identification of acute aortic dissection at initial presentation: results from the international registry of acute aortic dissection.

BACKGROUND: In 2010, the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology released guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with thoracic aortic disease, which identified high-risk clinical features to assist in the early detection of acute aortic dissection. The sensitivity of these risk markers has not been validated. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection from 1996 to 2009. The number of patients with confirmed acute aortic dissection who presented with 1 or more of 12 proposed clinical risk markers was determined. An aortic dissection detection (ADD) risk score of 0 to 3 was calculated on the basis of the number of risk categories (high-risk predisposing conditions, high-risk pain features, high-risk examination features) in which patients met criteria. The ADD risk score was tested for sensitivity. Of 2538 patients with acute aortic dissection, 2430 (95.7%) were identified by 1 or more of 12 proposed clinical risk markers. With the use of the ADD risk score, 108 patients (4.3%) were identified as low risk (ADD score 0), 927 patients (36.5%) were intermediate risk (ADD score 1), and 1503 patients (59.2%) were high risk (ADD score 2 or 3). Among 108 patients with no clinical risk markers present (ADD score 0), 72 had chest x-rays recorded, of which 35 (48.6%) demonstrated a widened mediastinum. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical risk markers proposed in the 2010 thoracic aortic disease guidelines and their application as part of the ADD risk score comprise a highly sensitive clinical tool for the detection of acute aortic dissection.

Diagnostic value of coronary artery calcium scoring in low-intermediate risk patients evaluated in the emergency department for acute coronary syndrome.

Early and accurate triage of patients with possible ischemic chest pain remains challenging in the emergency department because current risk stratification techniques have significant cost and limited availability. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic value of the coronary artery calcium score (CACS) for the detection of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in low- to intermediate-risk patients evaluated in the emergency department for suspected acute coronary syndromes. A total of 225 patients presenting to the emergency department with acute chest pain and Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) scores <4 who underwent non-contrast- and contrast-enhanced coronary computed tomographic angiography were included. CACS was calculated from the noncontrast scan using the Agatston method. The prevalence of obstructive CAD (defined from the contrast scan as ≥ 50% maximal reduction in luminal diameter in any segment) was 9% and increased significantly with higher scores (p <0.01 for trend). CACS of 0 were observed in 133 patients (59%), of whom only 2 (1.5%) had obstructive CAD. The diagnostic accuracy of CACS to detect obstructive CAD was good, with an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.88 and a negative predictive value of 99% for a CACS of 0. In a multivariate model, CACS was independently associated with obstructive CAD (odds ratio 7.01, p = 0.02) and provided additional diagnostic value over traditional CAD risk factors. In conclusion, CACS appears to be an effective initial tool for risk stratification of low- to intermediate-risk patients with possible acute coronary syndromes, on the basis of its high negative predictive value and additive diagnostic value.

Comparison of frequency of inducible myocardial ischemia in patients presenting to emergency department with typical versus atypical or nonanginal chest pain.

The present study was designed to assess the value of the presenting symptom of "typical" anginal pain, "atypical/nonanginal" pain, or the lack of chest pain in predicting the presence of inducible myocardial ischemia using cardiac stress testing in emergency department patients being evaluated for possible acute coronary syndrome. We performed a retrospective observational study of adult patients who were evaluated for acute coronary syndrome in an emergency department chest pain unit. The presenting symptoms were obtained from a structured questionnaire administered before stress testing. Patient chest pain was categorized according to the presence of substernal chest pain or discomfort that was provoked by exertion or emotional stress and was relieved by rest and/or nitroglycerin. Chest pain was classified as "typical" angina if all 3 descriptors were present and "atypical" or "nonanginal" if <3 descriptors were present. All patients underwent serial biomarker and cardiac stress testing before discharge. A total of 2,525 patients met the eligibility criteria. Inducible ischemia on stress testing was found in 33 (14%, 95% confidence interval 10% to 19%) of the 231 patients who had typical anginal pain, 238 (11%, 95% confidence interval 10% to 13%) of the 2,140 patients presenting with atypical/nonanginal chest pain, and 25 (16%, 95% confidence interval 11% to 22%) of the 153 patients who had no complaint of chest pain on presentation. Compared to patients with atypical or no chest pain, patients with typical chest pain were not significantly more likely to have inducible ischemia on stress testing (likelihood ratio +1.25, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.78). In conclusion, in our study, the patients who presented with "typical" angina were no more likely to have inducible myocardial ischemia on stress testing than patients with other presenting symptoms.

Iatrogenic claudication from a vascular closure device after cardiac catheterization.

We report a case of iatrogenic claudication as a result of a misplaced percutaneous arterial closure device (PACD) used to obtain hemostasis after cardiac catheterization. The patient presented one week after his procedure with complaints suggestive of right lower extremity claudication. Computed tomographic angiography demonstrated a near total occlusion of the right common femoral artery from a PACD implemented during the cardiac catheterization. The use of PACD's to obtain rapid hemostasis is estimated to occur in half of all cardiac catheterizations. Ischemic complications as a result of these devices must be considered when evaluating post procedural patients with extremity complaints.

The limited utility of routine cardiac stress testing in emergency department chest pain patients younger than 40 years.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This is a study designed to evaluate the utility of routine provocative cardiac testing in low-risk young adult (younger than 40 years) patients evaluated for an acute coronary syndrome in an emergency department (ED) setting. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of patients aged 23 to 40 years who were evaluated for acute coronary syndrome in an ED-based chest pain unit from March 2004 to September 2007. All patients had serial cardiac biomarker testing to rule out myocardial infarction and then underwent provocative cardiac testing to identify the presence of myocardial ischemia. Patients were excluded from the study if they had known coronary artery disease, had ECG findings diagnostic of myocardial infarction or ischemia, or self-admitted, or tested positive for cocaine use. RESULTS: Of the 220 patients who met inclusion criteria, 6 patients (2.7%; 95% confidence interval 1% to 5.8%) had positive stress test results. Among these 6 patients, 4 underwent subsequent coronary angiography that demonstrated no obstructive coronary disease, suggesting the initial provocative study was falsely positive. For the remaining 2 patients, no diagnostic angiography was performed. Discounting the patients who had negative angiography results, only 2 of 220 study patients (0.9%; 95% confidence interval 0.1% to 3.2%) had a provocative test result that was positive for myocardial ischemia. CONCLUSION: In our study, a combination of age younger than 40 years, nondiagnostic ECG result, and 2 sets of negative cardiac biomarker results at least 6 hours apart identified a patient group with a very low rate of true-positive provocative testing. Routine stress testing added little to the diagnostic evaluation of this patient group and was falsely positive in all patients who consented to diagnostic coronary angiography (4 of 6 cases).