Management of acute chest pain: A major role for coronary CT angiography.

Most patients presenting with acute chest pain (ACP) at the emergency unit do not have any marked electrocardiogram abnormalities or known history of heart disease. Identifying the few patients who have, or will actually develop acute coronary syndrome in this group that is considered to be at low risk, is an actual clinical challenge for emergency department physicians. In these patients, the goal of complementary non-invasive morphological or functional imaging tests is to exclude heart disease. The diagnostic values of coronary CT angiography include a sensitivity of 96% and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.09, which are highly contributory to the diagnosis, and the integration of this imaging test into a decision tree algorithm appears to be the least expensive strategy with the best cost/effective ratio. Coronary CT angiography is indicated in the presence of ACP associated with an inconclusive electrocardiogram, in the absence of any other obvious diagnoses, when the ultrasensitive troponin assay is negative or the dynamic changes are modest, slow and/or inconclusive. Ideally, coronary CT angiography should be performed within 3 to 48hours after the initial consultation.

[A case review: About a STEMI in the very elderly]. / Un cas, une revue: un SCA ST+ chez le sujet très âgé.

Because of the demographic growth of our societies and the increasing prevalence of coronary artery disease with age, we will be increasingly faced with the treatment of myocardial ST+ very elderly patients (>90 years?). If evidence-based medicine does not exist within this framework, there are many registries that can guide us in their care. First, age should not in itself be an indication against reperfusion conventional techniques. In fact recommendations put no upper age limit. The primary angioplasty technical success, which is identical to the younger populations, is the treatment of choice and should be performed preferably by radial arterial access. The thrombolytic alternative, validated for octogenarians, has not been studied for older. Bleeding, neurological, ischemic complications and hospital mortality are more common than in younger populations, especially as the initial hemodynamic alteration is important, but the survivors have the same life-threatening or even better than that of a same reference population ages. Which in itself even justifies maximum adhesion to the therapeutic recommendations taking into account the co-morbidities and possible visceral shortcomings.