Elements of the fourth universal definition used in the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction

Krishna Modi, J. McCord, M. Hudson, M. Moyer, G. Jacobsen, G. Murtagh, R. Nowak
{"title":"Elements of the fourth universal definition used in the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction","authors":"Krishna Modi, J. McCord, M. Hudson, M. Moyer, G. Jacobsen, G. Murtagh, R. Nowak","doi":"10.15406/jccr.2021.14.00538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"contribution of symptoms, ECG changes, cardiac imaging abnormalities, and coronary angiography in the diagnosis of AMI. Abstract In the era of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays, a high proportion of individuals coming to the emergency department (ED) suspected of having an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) will generate a reportable troponin concentration. This results in greater scrutiny in clinical context to differentiate from myocardial injury to prevent inappropriate treatment plans, hospitalizations, and cost to the healthcare system compared to contemporary troponin assays. This study evaluates the use of ischemic symptoms, ECG changes, abnormal angiography/imaging results, which adjudicating physicians use in determining the diagnosis of AMI, as per the 4 th universal definition of MI. Patients who presented to the ED and were evaluated for possible AMI were included in this study. After completion of patient care, a diagnosis of AMI was independently adjudicated by 2 cardiologists and 1 emergency medicine physician. This adjudication process determined that patient symptomatology was the most prevalent factor, influencing the adjudication process in 95.2% of AMI diagnoses. Electrocardiography supported AMI diagnosis in 35.7% of patients, with significantly more utility in diagnosing Type 2 AMI. Of the 4 factors, coronary angiography was less performed (10.5%) yet had a high positive rate, being used as one of the confirming factors in 59.5% of all AMI patients. Coronary angiography had greater utility in diagnosing Type 1 AMI. Imaging including echocardiography and nuclear imaging was performed in 30.1% of all patients but was a factor in diagnosing AMI in 26.2% AMI patients. This study emphasizes that symptomology remains critical in diagnosing AMI.","PeriodicalId":15200,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiology & Current Research","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiology & Current Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15406/jccr.2021.14.00538","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

contribution of symptoms, ECG changes, cardiac imaging abnormalities, and coronary angiography in the diagnosis of AMI. Abstract In the era of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays, a high proportion of individuals coming to the emergency department (ED) suspected of having an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) will generate a reportable troponin concentration. This results in greater scrutiny in clinical context to differentiate from myocardial injury to prevent inappropriate treatment plans, hospitalizations, and cost to the healthcare system compared to contemporary troponin assays. This study evaluates the use of ischemic symptoms, ECG changes, abnormal angiography/imaging results, which adjudicating physicians use in determining the diagnosis of AMI, as per the 4 th universal definition of MI. Patients who presented to the ED and were evaluated for possible AMI were included in this study. After completion of patient care, a diagnosis of AMI was independently adjudicated by 2 cardiologists and 1 emergency medicine physician. This adjudication process determined that patient symptomatology was the most prevalent factor, influencing the adjudication process in 95.2% of AMI diagnoses. Electrocardiography supported AMI diagnosis in 35.7% of patients, with significantly more utility in diagnosing Type 2 AMI. Of the 4 factors, coronary angiography was less performed (10.5%) yet had a high positive rate, being used as one of the confirming factors in 59.5% of all AMI patients. Coronary angiography had greater utility in diagnosing Type 1 AMI. Imaging including echocardiography and nuclear imaging was performed in 30.1% of all patients but was a factor in diagnosing AMI in 26.2% AMI patients. This study emphasizes that symptomology remains critical in diagnosing AMI.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
诊断急性心肌梗死时使用的第四个通用定义的要素
症状、心电图改变、心脏影像学异常和冠状动脉造影在AMI诊断中的作用。在高灵敏度心肌肌钙蛋白(hs-cTn)检测的时代,高比例的个体来到急诊科(ED)怀疑患有急性心肌梗死(AMI)将产生可报告的肌钙蛋白浓度。与当代肌钙蛋白测定相比,这导致临床背景下对心肌损伤进行更严格的检查,以防止不适当的治疗计划、住院治疗和医疗保健系统的成本。本研究评估了缺血性症状、心电图变化、异常血管造影/成像结果的使用,根据心肌梗死的第四种通用定义,判断医生在确定AMI诊断时使用这些结果。就诊于急诊科并被评估可能存在AMI的患者被纳入本研究。完成患者护理后,由2名心脏科医生和1名急诊医师独立判断AMI的诊断。该判定过程确定患者症状是最普遍的因素,影响了95.2% AMI诊断的判定过程。35.7%的患者心电图支持AMI诊断,在诊断2型AMI方面有更大的实用性。在这4个因素中,冠状动脉造影的检出率较低(10.5%),但其检出率较高,在59.5%的AMI患者中作为确诊因素之一。冠状动脉造影在诊断1型AMI方面有更大的价值。包括超声心动图和核成像在内的成像在所有患者中占30.1%,但在26.2%的AMI患者中是诊断AMI的一个因素。本研究强调症状学仍然是AMI诊断的关键。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Prevalence of delirium in the postoperative period of cardiac surgery AL amyloidosis masquerading as cardiac syncope: a case report Etiological profile of acute pericarditis at the Yalgado-Ouedraogo university hospital in Ouagadougou at Burkina Faso Pilot experience with VV ECLS in a single hospital in a developing nation COVID 19 infection requiring ECMO support after Fontan operation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1