Search

Background: The HEART (History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk factors, and initial Troponin) score is an easy-to-apply instrument to stratify patients with chest pain according to their short-term risk for major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), but its effect on daily practice is unknown.Objective: To measure the effect of use of the HEART score on patient outcomes and use of health care resources.Design: Stepped-wedge, cluster randomized trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01756846).Setting: Emergency departments in 9 Dutch hospitals.Patients: Unselected patients with chest pain presenting at emergency departments in 2013 and 2014.Intervention: All hospitals started with usual care. Every 6 weeks, 1 hospital was randomly assigned to switch to "HEART care," during which physicians calculated the HEART score to guide patient management.Measurements: For safety, a noninferiority margin of a 3.0% absolute increase in MACEs within 6 weeks was set. Other outcomes included use of health care resources, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness.Results: A total of 3648 patients were included (1827 receiving usual care and 1821 receiving HEART care). Six-week incidence of MACEs during HEART care was 1.3% lower than during usual care (upper limit of the 1-sided 95% CI, 2.1% [within the noninferiority margin of 3.0%]). In low-risk patients, incidence of MACEs was 2.0% (95% CI, 1.2% to 3.3%). No statistically significant differences in early discharge, readmissions, recurrent emergency department visits, outpatient visits, or visits to general practitioners were observed.Limitation: Physicians were hesitant to refrain from admission and diagnostic tests in patients classified as low risk by the HEART score.Conclusion: Using the HEART score during initial assessment of patients with chest pain is safe, but the effect on health care resources is limited, possibly due to nonadherence to management recommendations.Primary Funding Source: Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In patients with repaired tetralogy of Fallot (rTOF), multiple reoperations or percutaneous interventions after pulmonary valve replacement (PVR) may be necessary due to limited homograft durability. However, data to guide individualised prediction of homograft durability remain scarce. The aim of this study was to provide risk models for RV to pulmonary artery homograft durability.Methods: This retrospective multicentre study included consecutive patients with rTOF who had undergone PVR at an age of >12 years. Homograft dysfunction was defined as at least moderate pulmonary regurgitation (PR) or pulmonary stenosis (PS) (pressure gradient ≥36 mm Hg) as assessed by echocardiography. Reintervention was defined as percutaneous intervention or redo-PVR.Results: A total of 153 patients with rTOF were included (62% male, mean age at PVR 31±11 years, pulmonary homograft 96%, follow-up 9.6 years (IQR 5.9, 13.3)). Average freedom from homograft dysfunction and reintervention after 10 years was 74% and 89%, respectively. In multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis, postoperative PS ≥20 mm Hg (HR 6.52, 95% CI 3.09 to 13.7), postoperative PR ≥ grade 1 (HR 3.13, 95% CI 1.45 to 6.74) and age at PVR <18 years (HR 3.52, 95% CI 1.64 to 7.53) were independently predictive for homograft dysfunction. In patients without any risk factor, 10-year freedom from homograft dysfunction and reintervention was excellent (91% and 96%, respectively) in contrast to patients with ≥2 risk factors (25% and 73%, respectively).Conclusions: Individualised prediction of homograft durability in patients with rTOF can be guided by early postoperative echocardiography. In adult patients without early postoperative PS or PR, homograft dysfunction and reintervention are unlikely to occur within 10 years, and follow-up may be less stringent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]