Usefulness of High-Sensitivity Troponin I in Risk Stratification and Final Disposition of Patients with Acute Heart Failure in the Emergency Department: Comparison between HFpEF vs. HFrEF.

Background and Objectives: In patients with acute heart failure (AHF), there is no definite evidence on the relationship between high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTnI) and the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) comparing the reduced and preserved EF conditions. Materials and Methods: Between January and April 2022, we retrospectively analyzed the data from 386 patients admitted to the emergency departments (ED) of five hospitals in Rome, Italy, for AHF. The criteria for inclusion were a final diagnosis of AHF; a cardiac ultrasound and hs-cTnI evaluations in the ED; and age > 18 yrs. We excluded patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Based on echocardiography and hs-cTnI evaluations, the patients were grouped for (1) preserved (HFpEF) or (2) reduced LVEF (HFrEF) and a a) negative (within the normal range value) or b) positive (above the normal range value) of hs-cTnI, respectively. Results: There was a significant negative relationship between a positive test for hs-cTnI and LVEF. When compared to the group with a negative hs-cTnI test, the patients with a positive test, both from the HFpEF and HFrEF subgroups, were significantly more likely to have an adverse outcome, such as being admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) or dying in the ED. Moreover, a reduced ejection fraction was linked with a final disposition to a higher level of care. Conclusions: In patients admitted to the ED for AHF without ACS, there is a negative relationship between hs-cTnI and a reduced LVEF, although a significant percentage of patients with a preserved LVEF also resulted to have high levels of hs-cTnI. In the absence of ACS, hs-cTnI seems to be a reliable biomarker of myocardial injury in AHF in the ED and should be considered as a risk stratification parameter for these subjects regardless of the left ventricular function. Further larger prospective studies are needed to confirm these preliminary data.

Is There a Risk of Misinterpretation of Potassium Concentration from Undetectable Hemolysis Using a POCT Blood Gas Analyzer in the Emergency Department?

Background and Objectives: Hemolysis is reported to be present in up to 10% of blood gas specimens in the central lab; however, few data on the incidence of hemolysis using a point-of-care testing (POCT) blood gas analysis are available in the setting of the emergency department. The aims of this study were: (1) to analyze the prevalence of hemolysis in blood gas samples collected in the ED using a POCT device; and (2) to evaluate the impact of hemolysis on blood sample results and its clinical consequences. Materials and Methods: We collected 525 consecutive POCT arterial blood gas samples using syringes with electrolyte-balanced heparin within 3 different EDs in the metropolitan area of Rome. Immediately after the collection, the blood samples were checked for the presence of hemolysis with a POCT instrument (i.e., HEMCHECK, H-10 ®). The samples were then subsequently processed for blood gasses, and an electrolytes analysis by a second operator blinded for the hemolysis results. A venous blood sample was simultaneously collected, analyzed for it's potassium value, and used as a reference. Results: Of the samples, 472 were considered for the statistics, while 53 were excluded due to the high percentage of hemolysis due to operator fault in carrying out the measurement. The final mean hemolysis per operator was 12% (±13% SD), and the total final hemolysis was 14.4%.Potassium (K+) was significantly higher in the hemolyzed group compared with the non-hemolyzed sample (4.60 ± 0.11 vs. 3.99 ± 0.03 mEq/L; p < 0.001), and there were differences between arterial potassium versus venous potassium (D(a-v) K+, 0.29 ± 0.06 vs.−0.19 ± 0.02 mEq/L, p < 0.01). A Bland−Altman analysis confirmed that hemolysis significantly overestimated blood potassium level. Conclusion: Almost 12% of POCT blood gas analysis samples performed in the ED could be hemolyzed, and the presence of this hemolysis is not routinely detected. This could cause an error in the interpretation of the results, leading to the consideration of potassium concentrations being below the lower limit within the normal limits and also leading to the diagnosis of false hyperkalemia, which would have potential clinical consequences in therapeutic decision-making in the ED. The routine use of a POCT hemolysis detector could help prevent any misdiagnoses.

A pilot study on the application of the current European guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndrome without elevation of ST segment (NSTEMI) in the Emergency Department setting in the Italian region Lazio.

BACKGROUND: In 2011 the European Society of Cardiology published the new guidelines for the treatment and management of acute coronary syndrome without elevation of the ST segment (NSTEMI). For the treatment of the syndrome, the use of P2Y12 inhibitors in addition to aspirin was strongly recommended (evidence IA). We studied the application of this recommendation in the setting of the emergency department in the vast and uneven area of the Italian region Lazio, three years after the release of these drugs in Italy. METHODS: 121 consecutive patients (65% older than 65 years) affected by NSTEMI were recruited between May and July 2013. During the transition in the emergency department data was collected on patient's symptoms, syndrome severity and type & timing of treatments chosen. Adherence to the guidelines was evaluated considering the number of "good treated" patients: these being the patients that received at least 80% of the main five recommendations on percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) timing, antiplatelet and anti-coagulant therapy suggested by the European Cardiology Task Force (ESC guidelines, 2011) for the very acute phase of NSTEMI. RESULTS: Patients were treated with: 1) 35% of cases with double antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulation (DAPT+AC), 2) 22% of cases with single antiplatelet and anticoagulation (SAPT+AC), 3) 6% of cases with a single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT), 4) 6% of cases with a double antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and 5) 24% of cases did not receive any therapy. Data on PCI was available for 95 patients and, of these, only 82% of the patients underwent the procedure. The percentage of "good treated" patients were among of 20-40%, depending on PCI timing--as guidelines suggested--was considered as mandatory (20,5%) or as the extreme time limit (40%). Significant differences were found between patients treated in a central hospital with a hemodynamic laboratory active 24/24hr (HUB) and patients treated in the other hospital (SPOKE). HUBs showed a higher percent of "good treated" patients, a higher percentage of early invasive treated and a better adherence to recommended pharmacological therapy. CONCLUSIONS: A significant number of patients did not receive adequate treatment during the emergency department stay. The absence of hemodynamic services increases the risk of inadequate treatment.

[Management strategies and choice of antithrombotic treatment in patients admitted with acute coronary syndrome--executive summary for clinical practice. Consensus Document of the Regional Chapters of the Italian National Association of Hospital Cardiologists (ANMCO) and of the Italian Society of Emergency Medicine (SIMEU)]. / Strategie Assistenziali e Scelta della Terapia Antitrombotica nei Pazienti Ricoverati con Diagnosi di Sindrome Coronarica Acuta--Sintesi Operativa per la Pratica Clinica. Documento congiunto delle Sezioni Regionali del Lazio dell'Associazione Nazionale Medici Cardiologi Ospedalieri (ANMCO) e della Società Italiana di Medicina di Emergenza-Urgenza (SIMEU).

This document has been developed by the Lazio regional chapters of two scientific associations, the Italian National Association of Hospital Cardiologists (ANMCO) and the Italian Society of Emergency Medicine (SIMEU), whose members are actively involved in the everyday management of Acute Coronary Syndromes (ACS). The document is aimed at providing a specific, practical, evidence-based guideline for the effective management of antithrombotic treatment (antiplatelet and anticoagulant) in the complex and ever changing scenario of ACS. The document employs a synthetic approach which considers two main issues: the actual operative context of treatment delivery and the general management strategy.