Why the study?
Does noninvasive cardiac imaging improve the triage and management of patients presenting with chest pain to the emergency department?
Does noninvasive cardiac imaging improve the triage and management of patients presenting with chest pain to the emergency department?
Noninvasive cardiac imaging provides significant diagnostic and prognostic value in the triage of emergency department patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes, safely reducing unnecessary hospitalizations.
Supports noninvasive imaging for ED chest pain triage; leaves open definitive practice change pending randomized trials.
Optimal management of patients presenting with chest pain to the emergency department is a major challenge, both in terms of a diagnostic dilemma and consumption of resources. The triage of such patients can be aided vastly by the appropriate use of noninvasive imaging. Noninvasive imaging modalities such as echocardiogram, radionuclide perfusion studies, positron emission tomography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography have all been demonstrated to have favorable diagnostic and prognostic value, with an enhanced sensitivity to detect acute ischemia. A normal noninvasive evaluation in the appropriate clinical setting presents a strong argument against acute ischemia as an etiology of the chest pain. Randomized trials of both rest and stress imaging in the emergency department have confirmed a reduction in unnecessary hospitalizations and cost savings without compromising the safety of the patient. Cardiac magnetic resonance and computed tomography would provide an insight into subendocardial ischemia, the detection of which has previously been difficult, using single-photon emission tomography and echocardiography. In this review, novel hot-spot imaging modalities are discussed including infarct-avid imaging agents and ischemia-avid imaging agents, thus elucidating the pathophysiology of reperfusion-induced cell death. These agents represent work in evolution and are likely to be used routinely in the future as understanding of coronary syndromes and coronary artery disease becomes clearer.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vashist et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: