Background— The TRAPID-AMI trial study (High-Sensitivity Troponin-T Assay for Rapid Rule-Out of Acute Myocardial Infarction) evaluated high-sensitivity cardiac troponin-T (hs-cTnT) in a 1-hour acute myocardial infarction (AMI) exclusion algorithm. Our study objective was to evaluate the prognostic utility of a modified HEART score (m-HS) within this trial. Methods and Results— Twelve centers evaluated 1282 patients in the emergency department for possible AMI from 2011 to 2013. Measurements of hs-cTnT (99th percentile, 14 ng/L) were performed at 0, 1, 2, and 4 to 14 hours. Evaluation for major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) occurred at 30 days (death or AMI). Low-risk patients had an m-HS≤3 and had either hs-cTnT<14 ng/L over serial testing or had AMI excluded by the 1-hour protocol. By the 1-hour protocol, 777 (60%) patients had an AMI excluded. Of those 777 patients, 515 (66.3%) patients had an m-HS≤3, with 1 (0.2%) patient having a MACE, and 262 (33.7%) patients had an m-HS≥4, with 6 (2.3%) patients having MACEs ( P =0.007). Over 4 to 14 hours, 661 patients had a hs-cTnT<14 ng/L. Of those 661 patients, 413 (62.5%) patients had an m-HS≤3, with 1 (0.2%) patient having a MACE, and 248 (37.5%) patients had an m-HS≥4, with 5 (2.0%) patients having MACEs ( P =0.03). Conclusions— Serial testing of hs-cTnT over 1 hour along with application of an m-HS identified a low-risk population that might be able to be directly discharged from the emergency department.

BackgroundThe 1-hour (h) algorithm triages patients presenting with suspected acute myocardial infarction (AMI) to the emergency department (ED) towards “rule-out,” “rule-in,” or “observation,” depending on baseline and 1-h levels of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn). The economic consequences of applying the accelerated 1-h algorithm are unknown.Methods and findingsWe performed a post-hoc economic analysis in a large, diagnostic, multicenter study of hs-cTnT using central adjudication of the final diagnosis by two independent cardiologists. Length of stay (LoS), resource utilization (RU), and predicted diagnostic accuracy of the 1-h algorithm compared to standard of care (SoC) in the ED were estimated. The ED LoS, RU, and accuracy of the 1-h algorithm was compared to that achieved by the SoC at ED discharge. Expert opinion was sought to characterize clinical implementation of the 1-h algorithm, which required blood draws at ED presentation and 1h, after which “rule-in” patients were transferred for coronary angiography, “rule-out” patients underwent outpatient stress testing, and “observation” patients received SoC. Unit costs were for the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Germany. The sensitivity and specificity for the 1-h algorithm were 87% and 96%, respectively, compared to 69% and 98% for SoC. The mean ED LoS for the 1-h algorithm was 4.3h—it was 6.5h for SoC, which is a reduction of 33%. The 1-h algorithm was associated with reductions in RU, driven largely by the shorter LoS in the ED for patients with a diagnosis other than AMI. The estimated total costs per patient were £2,480 for the 1-h algorithm compared to £4,561 for SoC, a reduction of up to 46%.ConclusionsThe analysis shows that the use of 1-h algorithm is associated with reduction in overall AMI diagnostic costs, provided it is carefully implemented in clinical practice. These results need to be prospectively validated in the future.

No abstract

No abstract

In critically ill patients, quinolones and antipseudomonal cephalosporins may prevent the acquisition of P. aeruginosa and may have a negligible influence on the acquisition and emergence of resistance.

The presence of frailty is an independent risk factor of 30-day mortality in nonsevere dependent older patients attended with AHF in EDs.

No abstract

No abstract