48 Predictors of revascularisation in patients with typical angina presenting to the rapid access chest pain clinic

A. Gall, J. Mora, G. Connolly, Mavin N. Kashyap, A. Dastidar, Nikhil Joshi, S. Dorman, K. Silva, J. Strange, T. Johnson, E. Sammut
{"title":"48 Predictors of revascularisation in patients with typical angina presenting to the rapid access chest pain clinic","authors":"A. Gall, J. Mora, G. Connolly, Mavin N. Kashyap, A. Dastidar, Nikhil Joshi, S. Dorman, K. Silva, J. Strange, T. Johnson, E. Sammut","doi":"10.1136/HEARTJNL-2020-BCS.48","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background In the UK, the rapid access chest pain clinic (RACPC) is increasingly used as an open access resource for patients with chest pain presenting to GP surgeries or Emergency Departments. Patients are not uncommonly admitted for inpatient investigation and treatment from RACPC. This study aimed to assess the outcome of patients presenting to our RACPC and look for predictors of acute coronary syndrome and revascularisation. Methods Electronic notes of all patients assessed in our high-volume Rapid Access Chest Pain Clinic (RACPC) within a 12-month period (2018–19) were reviewed. Patients admitted directly from RACPC with ACS were compared to those felt to have typical anginal symptoms who were managed on an outpatient basis. Information on demographics, symptoms, initial investigations and management were obtained. Results 2416 patients were assessed in the RACPC during the study period. Of these, 378 (15.6%) presented with symptoms thought to represent typical anginal chest pain (CP), 1357 (56.2%) had atypical CP and 681 (28.2%) had non-anginal CP. Patients with typical angina had a median age of 68 years, 121 (22%) female, 216 (57%) had high cholesterol, 86 (23%) had diabetes, 220 (58%) had hypertension, 175 (46%) had a family history, and 218 (58%) were current or ex-smokers. The mean number of risk factors in those presenting with typical CP was 2.7. See Table 1. On univariate analysis regression, gender, ACS presentation, ischaemic ECG changes and regional wall motion abnormality on echocardiogram were predictors of revascularisation, however on multivariate analysis only gender (OR 2.447, CI 1.336-4.480, p= Conclusion The rapid access chest pain clinic is a valuable resource for prompt assessment of patients with suspected cardiac pain. Our experience suggests patients seen with typical angina represent a high-risk group with high rates of revascularisation, particularly in those with suspected ACS. Within our cohort, predictors of revascularisation were ACS presentation and male gender. Conflict of Interest None","PeriodicalId":102313,"journal":{"name":"Acute Coronary Syndromes & Interventional Cardiology","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acute Coronary Syndromes & Interventional Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/HEARTJNL-2020-BCS.48","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

Background In the UK, the rapid access chest pain clinic (RACPC) is increasingly used as an open access resource for patients with chest pain presenting to GP surgeries or Emergency Departments. Patients are not uncommonly admitted for inpatient investigation and treatment from RACPC. This study aimed to assess the outcome of patients presenting to our RACPC and look for predictors of acute coronary syndrome and revascularisation. Methods Electronic notes of all patients assessed in our high-volume Rapid Access Chest Pain Clinic (RACPC) within a 12-month period (2018–19) were reviewed. Patients admitted directly from RACPC with ACS were compared to those felt to have typical anginal symptoms who were managed on an outpatient basis. Information on demographics, symptoms, initial investigations and management were obtained. Results 2416 patients were assessed in the RACPC during the study period. Of these, 378 (15.6%) presented with symptoms thought to represent typical anginal chest pain (CP), 1357 (56.2%) had atypical CP and 681 (28.2%) had non-anginal CP. Patients with typical angina had a median age of 68 years, 121 (22%) female, 216 (57%) had high cholesterol, 86 (23%) had diabetes, 220 (58%) had hypertension, 175 (46%) had a family history, and 218 (58%) were current or ex-smokers. The mean number of risk factors in those presenting with typical CP was 2.7. See Table 1. On univariate analysis regression, gender, ACS presentation, ischaemic ECG changes and regional wall motion abnormality on echocardiogram were predictors of revascularisation, however on multivariate analysis only gender (OR 2.447, CI 1.336-4.480, p= Conclusion The rapid access chest pain clinic is a valuable resource for prompt assessment of patients with suspected cardiac pain. Our experience suggests patients seen with typical angina represent a high-risk group with high rates of revascularisation, particularly in those with suspected ACS. Within our cohort, predictors of revascularisation were ACS presentation and male gender. Conflict of Interest None
48个典型心绞痛患者血运重建的预测因子在快速进入胸痛诊所
背景在英国,快速获取胸痛诊所(RACPC)越来越多地被用于GP手术或急诊科胸痛患者的开放获取资源。患者接受RACPC的住院调查和治疗并不罕见。本研究旨在评估到RACPC就诊的患者的预后,并寻找急性冠状动脉综合征和血运重建的预测因素。方法回顾我院大容量快速接入胸痛门诊(RACPC) 12个月(2018 - 2019年)评估的所有患者的电子病历。直接从RACPC入院的ACS患者与那些在门诊治疗的有典型心绞痛症状的患者进行比较。获得了人口统计、症状、初步调查和管理方面的信息。结果2416例患者在研究期间接受了RACPC评估。其中,378例(15.6%)表现为典型心绞痛性胸痛(CP), 1357例(56.2%)为非典型心绞痛性胸痛,681例(28.2%)为非心绞痛性胸痛。典型心绞痛患者的中位年龄为68岁,121例(22%)为女性,216例(57%)为高胆固醇,86例(23%)为糖尿病,220例(58%)为高血压,175例(46%)有家族史,218例(58%)为当前吸烟者或戒烟者。典型CP患者的平均危险因素数为2.7。见表1。在单因素回归分析中,性别、ACS表现、缺血性心电图改变和超声心动图局部壁运动异常是血供重建的预测因素,而在多因素分析中,只有性别(OR 2.447, CI 1.336-4.480, p=)。结论:快速进入胸痛门诊是及时评估疑似心源性疼痛患者的宝贵资源。我们的经验表明,典型心绞痛患者是血运重建率高的高危人群,特别是那些疑似ACS的患者。在我们的队列中,血管重建的预测因素是ACS的表现和男性性别。利益冲突无
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信