毛细血管造影在确定非典型胸痛患者发生重大心脏不良事件风险方面的作用

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING
Senol Arslan, Sibel Guçlu Utlu, Rıza Gucal, Furkan Akpinar, Halil Ibrahim Doru, Onur Zengin, Melike Nur Çirçir, Nazım Onur Can
{"title":"毛细血管造影在确定非典型胸痛患者发生重大心脏不良事件风险方面的作用","authors":"Senol Arslan,&nbsp;Sibel Guçlu Utlu,&nbsp;Rıza Gucal,&nbsp;Furkan Akpinar,&nbsp;Halil Ibrahim Doru,&nbsp;Onur Zengin,&nbsp;Melike Nur Çirçir,&nbsp;Nazım Onur Can","doi":"10.1016/j.ienj.2024.101417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Various scoring systems have been developed to safely rule out the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome. Furthermore, the efficacy of these scoring systems in predicting the risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is debated. Our aim was to compare parameters such as Integrated Pulmonary Index (IPI) and End Tidal Carbon Dioxide (etCO2) measured in the emergency department with the HEART score in terms of its success in predicting the risk of major adverse cardiac events.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Patients with atypical chest pain were registered for the study by the emergency room physician. The patients were investigated regarding gender, age, background characteristics, prognostic accuracy of etCO2, IPI, MACE, and HEART scores.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>As a result of the analysis, higher HEART Score and lower etCO2 values were determined in the MACE group compared to the group without MACE. ROC analysis was performed to determine the power of IPI, HEART Score, and etCO2 to predict MACE. The findings revealed that IPI significantly predicted MACE with an AUC value of 0.737.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In our study, although the highest sensitivity values in determining the risk of 30-day MACE belonged to the HEART score, etCO2 and IPI might be other parameters that could be used to determine the risk of 30-day MACE.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48914,"journal":{"name":"International Emergency Nursing","volume":"73 ","pages":"Article 101417"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The utility of capnography in determining the risk of major cardiac adverse events in patients with atypical chest pain\",\"authors\":\"Senol Arslan,&nbsp;Sibel Guçlu Utlu,&nbsp;Rıza Gucal,&nbsp;Furkan Akpinar,&nbsp;Halil Ibrahim Doru,&nbsp;Onur Zengin,&nbsp;Melike Nur Çirçir,&nbsp;Nazım Onur Can\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ienj.2024.101417\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Various scoring systems have been developed to safely rule out the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome. Furthermore, the efficacy of these scoring systems in predicting the risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is debated. Our aim was to compare parameters such as Integrated Pulmonary Index (IPI) and End Tidal Carbon Dioxide (etCO2) measured in the emergency department with the HEART score in terms of its success in predicting the risk of major adverse cardiac events.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Patients with atypical chest pain were registered for the study by the emergency room physician. The patients were investigated regarding gender, age, background characteristics, prognostic accuracy of etCO2, IPI, MACE, and HEART scores.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>As a result of the analysis, higher HEART Score and lower etCO2 values were determined in the MACE group compared to the group without MACE. ROC analysis was performed to determine the power of IPI, HEART Score, and etCO2 to predict MACE. The findings revealed that IPI significantly predicted MACE with an AUC value of 0.737.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In our study, although the highest sensitivity values in determining the risk of 30-day MACE belonged to the HEART score, etCO2 and IPI might be other parameters that could be used to determine the risk of 30-day MACE.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Emergency Nursing\",\"volume\":\"73 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101417\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Emergency Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755599X24000120\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Emergency Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755599X24000120","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:为了安全地排除急性冠状动脉综合征的诊断,人们开发了各种评分系统。此外,这些评分系统在预测重大心脏不良事件(MACE)风险方面的功效也存在争议。我们的目的是比较在急诊科测量的肺综合指数(IPI)和潮气末二氧化碳(etCO2)等参数与 HEART 评分在预测重大心脏不良事件风险方面的成功率。对患者的性别、年龄、背景特征、etCO2、IPI、MACE 和 HEART 评分的预后准确性进行了调查。结果分析发现,与无 MACE 组相比,MACE 组的 HEART 评分更高,etCO2 值更低。为确定 IPI、HEART 评分和 etCO2 预测 MACE 的能力,进行了 ROC 分析。结论在我们的研究中,虽然确定 30 天 MACE 风险的最高灵敏度值属于 HEART 评分,但 etCO2 和 IPI 可能是可用于确定 30 天 MACE 风险的其他参数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The utility of capnography in determining the risk of major cardiac adverse events in patients with atypical chest pain

Introduction

Various scoring systems have been developed to safely rule out the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome. Furthermore, the efficacy of these scoring systems in predicting the risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is debated. Our aim was to compare parameters such as Integrated Pulmonary Index (IPI) and End Tidal Carbon Dioxide (etCO2) measured in the emergency department with the HEART score in terms of its success in predicting the risk of major adverse cardiac events.

Method

Patients with atypical chest pain were registered for the study by the emergency room physician. The patients were investigated regarding gender, age, background characteristics, prognostic accuracy of etCO2, IPI, MACE, and HEART scores.

Results

As a result of the analysis, higher HEART Score and lower etCO2 values were determined in the MACE group compared to the group without MACE. ROC analysis was performed to determine the power of IPI, HEART Score, and etCO2 to predict MACE. The findings revealed that IPI significantly predicted MACE with an AUC value of 0.737.

Conclusion

In our study, although the highest sensitivity values in determining the risk of 30-day MACE belonged to the HEART score, etCO2 and IPI might be other parameters that could be used to determine the risk of 30-day MACE.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
11.10%
发文量
85
期刊介绍: International Emergency Nursing is a peer-reviewed journal devoted to nurses and other professionals involved in emergency care. It aims to promote excellence through dissemination of high quality research findings, specialist knowledge and discussion of professional issues that reflect the diversity of this field. With an international readership and authorship, it provides a platform for practitioners worldwide to communicate and enhance the evidence-base of emergency care. The journal publishes a broad range of papers, from personal reflection to primary research findings, created by first-time through to reputable authors from a number of disciplines. It brings together research from practice, education, theory, and operational management, relevant to all levels of staff working in emergency care settings worldwide.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信