Suppr超能文献

焦点可能会检测到 ACS 患者的壁运动异常。

FOCUS may detect wall motion abnormalities in patients with ACS.

机构信息

Albany Medical Center Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Albany, NY, USA.

Stony Brook University Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Stony Brook, NY, USA.

出版信息

Am J Emerg Med. 2023 Jul;69:17-22. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2023.03.056. Epub 2023 Apr 2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Chest pain is a common presentation to the Emergency Department (ED) with roughly 6 million visits a year. The primary diagnostic modality for the identification of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is the electrocardiogram (ECG), which is used to screen for electrocardiographic findings representing acute coronary occlusion. It is known that the ischemia generated by an acutely occluded coronary vessel generates a wall motion abnormality which can be visualized by echocardiogram; however, emergency physician-performed focused cardiac ultrasound (FOCUS) currently does not have a formal role in the diagnosis of OMI within the emergency department.

PURPOSE

We sought to define the characteristics of FOCUS performed by emergency physicians of variable training levels in the identification of RWMA in patients presenting to the emergency department with high suspicion for ACS before undergoing cardiac catheterization or formal echocardiography. We also explored whether RWMA was associated with OMI in these patients.

METHODS

We performed a structured, retrospective review of adult patients presenting to a large, academic, tertiary care center with suspected ACS from July 1st, 2019, and October 24th, 2020. Patients were included if they underwent FOCUS in the ED during the time-period above for suspected ACS looking for RWMA and FOCUS images were stored and reviewable in our middleware software. The primary outcome was the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of FOCUS compared to formal echocardiography for the detection of RWMA. Secondary outcomes were sensitivity of FOCUS compared to formal echocardiography for detection of RWMA in patients with and without cardiac catheterization proven OMI and sensitivity and specificity of FOCUS operators based on training.

RESULTS

FOCUS for RWMA performed by emergency physicians had a sensitivity of 94% (95% CI, 82-98), specificity 35% (95% CI, 15-61), and overall accuracy of 78% (95% CI, 66-87). Of all subjects, 82% underwent urgent or emergency coronary angiography, of which 71% had OMI at the time of coronary angiography of the procedure. FOCUS identified RWMA in 87% of patients with coronary angiography proven OMI. Residents (PGY-1 - PGY-3) (n = 31) were able to detect RWMA with a sensitivity of 86% (95% CI, 64-96), a specificity of 56% (95% CI, 23-85%), and an accuracy of 77 (95% CI, 58-90%). Emergency ultrasound fellows and attendings (n = 34) were able to detect RWMA with a sensitivity of 85% (95% CI, 64-95%), a specificity of 75% (95% CI, 36-96%), and an accuracy of 82% (95% CI, 65-93%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our retrospective study concludes FOCUS performed by emergency physicians may be used to detect RWMA in patients with high concern for acute coronary syndrome. This may have its greatest utility in patients presenting without STEMI where the ECG is felt to be equivocal, but the clinician has high concern for OMI, in which the presence of RWMA might result in emergent cath lab activation, though this requires further study. The presence of RWMA in such cases may help to rule in OMI as a cause; however, the absence of RWMA should exclude OMI. Further research is necessary to confirm these findings.

摘要

背景

胸痛是急诊科(ED)常见的就诊症状,每年约有 600 万人次就诊。急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)的主要诊断方法是心电图(ECG),用于筛查代表急性冠状动脉闭塞的心电图发现。众所周知,急性闭塞冠状动脉产生的缺血会导致心肌运动异常,可通过超声心动图观察到;然而,急诊医生进行的心脏超声焦点检查(FOCUS)目前在急诊科诊断 OMI 方面没有正式作用。

目的

我们旨在确定不同培训水平的急诊医生在接受心脏导管检查或正式超声心动图检查之前,对高度怀疑 ACS 的急诊科就诊患者进行 FOCUS 检查,以识别 RWMA 的特征。我们还探讨了 RWMA 是否与这些患者的 OMI 有关。

方法

我们对 2019 年 7 月 1 日至 2020 年 10 月 24 日期间,在一家大型学术性三级护理中心就诊的疑似 ACS 患者进行了结构化、回顾性研究。如果患者在 ED 进行了 FOCUS 检查以寻找 RWMA,并且可以在我们的中间件软件中存储和查看 FOCUS 图像,则将其纳入研究。主要结局是 FOCUS 与正式超声心动图在检测 RWMA 方面的准确性、敏感性和特异性。次要结局是 FOCUS 在有和没有经导管证实的 OMI 的患者中检测 RWMA 的敏感性与正式超声心动图的比较,以及根据培训的 FOCUS 操作者的敏感性和特异性。

结果

急诊医生进行的 RWMA FOCUS 的敏感性为 94%(95%CI,82-98),特异性为 35%(95%CI,15-61),总体准确性为 78%(95%CI,66-87)。所有患者中,82%接受了紧急或紧急冠状动脉造影,其中 71%在冠状动脉造影时存在 OMI。FOCUS 可识别出 87%经冠状动脉造影证实为 OMI 的患者的 RWMA。住院医师(PGY-1-PGY-3)(n=31)检测 RWMA 的敏感性为 86%(95%CI,64-96),特异性为 56%(95%CI,23-85%),准确性为 77%(95%CI,58-90%)。急诊超声医师和主治医生(n=34)检测 RWMA 的敏感性为 85%(95%CI,64-95%),特异性为 75%(95%CI,36-96%),准确性为 82%(95%CI,65-93%)。

结论

我们的回顾性研究得出结论,急诊医生进行的 FOCUS 可能用于检测高度怀疑 ACS 的患者的 RWMA。这在心电图表现为不确定但临床医生高度怀疑 OMI 的患者中可能最有用,在这些患者中 RWMA 的存在可能导致紧急导管实验室激活,尽管这需要进一步研究。在这种情况下 RWMA 的存在可能有助于将 OMI 作为病因进行判断;然而,RWMA 的不存在应排除 OMI。需要进一步的研究来证实这些发现。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验