Citation

Lai SM, Anaikatti P, Thiruchelvam P, Chai SC, Yong Th, et al. (2018) Utility of an Emergency Department Chest Pain Protocol in Ruling Out Acute Coronary Syndrome. Int J Crit Care Emerg Med 4:051. doi.org/10.23937/2474-3674/1510051

Copyright

© 2018 Lai SM, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE | OPEN ACCESSDOI: 10.23937/2474-3674/1510051

Utility of an Emergency Department Chest Pain Protocol in Ruling Out Acute Coronary Syndrome

Shieh Mei Lai1*, Poongkulali Anaikatti1, Pravin Thiruchelvam2, Siang Chew Chai3, Thon Hon Yong3, Yew Seong Goh4, Sheldon Lee3, Rahul Goswami5, Charlene Jin Yee Liew6 and Pak Liang Goh5

1Consultant, Accident & Emergency Department, Changi General Hospital, Singapore

2Resident Physician, Accident & Emergency Department, Changi General Hospital, Singapore

3Consultant, Cardiology Department, Changi General Hospital, Singapore

4Senior Consultant, Cardiology Department, Changi General Hospital, Singapore

5Senior Consultant, Accident & Emergency Department, Changi General Hospital, Singapore

6Consultant, Diagnostic Radiology Department, Changi General Hospital, Singapore

Abstract

Objective

To assess the safety and efficacy of an Emergency Department Chest Pain Protocol in ruling out Acute Coronary Syndrome in a regional hospital in Singapore.

Methodology

An audit was carried out of the cases admitted to our Short Stay Unit (SSU) under the Chest Pain Protocol from June to November 2014. Patients presenting with chest pain and possible acute coronary syndrome, but with normal initial electrocardiogram (ECG) and troponin level, could undergo this rule-out protocol, which comprised serial ECGs and troponin levels, followed by selective outpatient treadmill or Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography (CCTA) if they were discharged.

The list of patients was electronically generated from our database at fortnightly intervals. Their casenotes were then reviewed, and phone follow-up done for discharged patients at least 30 days after discharge.

Primary outcome was missed Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) within 30 days, as determined by 2 independent cardiologists using pre-set criteria. Secondary outcomes were adverse events, and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) requiring Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI).

Results

During the period of audit, a total of 240 patients were admitted under the protocol, of which 3 were lost to follow-up. 4 patients were found to have ACS within 30 days, of which 3 were picked up by the protocol. There was 1 case of missed ACS, who had a negative treadmill after discharge from the SSU, but later had an ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI). 10 patients had stable CAD requiring PCI.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that the protocol is safe and can rule out ACS in most patients.