chest pain evaluation

38
DIAGNOSING THE CAUSE DIAGNOSING THE CAUSE OF CHEST PAIN OF CHEST PAIN Dr. Rashidi Ahmad Emergentist MD(USM), MMED(USM), FADUSM School of Medical Sciences USM Health Campus

Upload: rashidi-ahmad

Post on 07-May-2015

1.879 views

Category:

Health & Medicine


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Chest Pain Evaluation

DIAGNOSING THE CAUSE DIAGNOSING THE CAUSE OF CHEST PAINOF CHEST PAIN

Dr. Rashidi AhmadEmergentist

MD(USM), MMED(USM), FADUSM

School of Medical Sciences

USM Health Campus

Page 2: Chest Pain Evaluation

Knowledge is a process of pilling up Knowledge is a process of pilling up facts. Wisdom lies in their simplificationfacts. Wisdom lies in their simplification

Martin Luther King, Jr

Page 3: Chest Pain Evaluation

Introduction

Chest pain is the chief complaint in about 1-2% of outpatient visits.The cause is often non-cardiac BUT heart disease remains the leading cause of death.Chest pain in ED, > 50% due to CV condition.In outpatient primary: musculoskeletal conditions, GIT disease, stable CAD, pulmonary disease, etc.Unstable CAD is rare.15% never reach a definitive diagnosis.

Buntinx F, et al. Chest pain in general practice or in the hospital emergency department: is it the same? Fam Pract 2001;18:586-9.

Page 4: Chest Pain Evaluation
Page 5: Chest Pain Evaluation

Epidemiology of Chest pain in primary care setting & ED

Buntinx F, et al. Chest pain in general practice or in the hospital emergency department: is it the same? Fam Pract 2001;18:586-9.

Page 6: Chest Pain Evaluation

Chest Pain Origin - Difficult?

Various disease processes in a variety of organs.The severity of pain is often unrelated to its life threatening potential.The location of pain perceived by the patient frequently does not correspond with its source.PE, lab Ix, X-rays are often unavailable or non diagnostic.More than one disease process may be present.

Page 7: Chest Pain Evaluation
Page 8: Chest Pain Evaluation

Misdiagnosis of ACS

Young patientAtypical presentation & silent ischemiaPoor documentation & incomplete history & physical examinationECG misinterpretationReliance on laboratory assayInexperience doctorHesitance to admit patients with vague symptoms

Page 9: Chest Pain Evaluation

History

Chest discomfort ~ 80 - 85% Atypical presentation ~ 20%burning/indigestion ~ > 20%chest ache ~ 13%sharp, stabbing pain ~ 5%pain reproduced by palpation ~ 5%Silent ischemia ~ 23%

Page 10: Chest Pain Evaluation

History

• Up to 33% of patients (elderly & diabetes), who have AMI do not have pain. Canto et al,. JAMA, vol. 283, p. 3223, 2000

• The presence or absence of risk factors does not change the likelihood of cardiac. Graber & et al. Emergency Medicine April 2001

Page 11: Chest Pain Evaluation

Accuracy of chest pain diagnosis using the Hx & PE

WILLIAM E. CAYLEY, American family Physician. Volume 72, Number 10 , November 15, 2005

Page 12: Chest Pain Evaluation

Physical examination

Most often normal

Levine’s sign

Page 13: Chest Pain Evaluation

"No astute clinician is reassured by chest wall tenderness that reproduces a patient's pain, because 15% of patients with acute MI will have chest wall tenderness on palpation that reproduces their pain"

Rosen and Barkin. Emergency Medicine Concepts and Clinical Practice, St. Louis, Mosby, 1999

Page 14: Chest Pain Evaluation

Electrocardiogram

NOT a perfect indicator of cardiac diseaseONLY 50% with a proven AMI have positive initial ECG indicating the disorderUp to 76% of ACS – normal an initial ECG, non specific, or unchanged from previous ECG Around 5% of chest pain patients with normal ECG who were discharged from the ED were ultimately found to have ACS

Mc Carthy B, Wong J. Detecting acute ischaemia in ED. J Gen Int Med 1990; 5: 381-8

Page 15: Chest Pain Evaluation

Relation between time & ECG changes

Time Indication of infarct in ECG

1st to 3 hours 40%

4th to 6th hour 50%

7th to 9th hour 90%

10th to 12th hour Up to 100%

Page 16: Chest Pain Evaluation

Relation between Cardiac markers & time

Cardiac marker Within time of elevation

Myoglobin

1 – 3 hour

CK-MB/Trop I

Troponin T

4 – 8 hour

6 – 8 hour

Page 17: Chest Pain Evaluation

•At hours: 4 to 8 and 8 to 12 the CPK level is more sensitive (84% and 94%, respectively) in indicating AMI, than is troponin level (74% and 88%, respectively). •After 12 hours: troponin level is essentially 100% sensitive, whereas the CPK level becomes less sensitive

Graber & et al. Emergency Medicine April 2001

Page 18: Chest Pain Evaluation
Page 19: Chest Pain Evaluation

Acute Pulmonary embolism

Diagnosing PE requires a high degree of clinical suspicionSharp chest pain - 59%Dyspnea - 78%Cough - 43%Tachycardia - 30%Syncope 13%

Page 20: Chest Pain Evaluation

Acute Pulmonary embolism

• Not all patients with pulmonary embolus will be hypoxic or have tachycardia or tachypnea.

• Up to 50% of patients with DVT have a silent, or asymptomatic PE.

• Among PE patients without underlying pulmonary disease, ~ 12% have a PaO2>80 mmHG

Meingnan 7 et al. Archives of Internal Medicine, 2000, Vol 160; 159Stein & et al. Chest .1996, Vol. 109, 78

Page 21: Chest Pain Evaluation

Chest X Ray

Without infarction, the chest x-ray may be normal, or diminished pulmonary vascular markings in the embolized area may be noted.With infarction, the x-rays frequently shows a peripheral infiltrative lesion, with elevation of the diaphragm & pleural fluid on the affected site.

Page 22: Chest Pain Evaluation

DIAGNOSING THE CAUSE OF CHEST PAIN

Page 23: Chest Pain Evaluation

William E. Cayley, Jr., M.D., American Family Physician;Vol. 72/no. 10 (November 15, 2005)

Outpatient Diagnosis of Chest pain

Page 24: Chest Pain Evaluation

Diagnostic test makes sense

Page 25: Chest Pain Evaluation

Graber & et al. Emergency Medicine April 2001

Likelihood ratios (LR)& Bayes' nomogramare a useful & practical way of expressing the power of diagnostic tests in increasing or decreasing the likelihood of disease

Page 26: Chest Pain Evaluation

2 methods of estimating the pre-test probability:

Emergency gut feeling (educated guess) after the history & examination Clinical decision rules.

Page 27: Chest Pain Evaluation

Accuracy of chest pain diagnosis using the Hx & PE

WILLIAM E. CAYLEY, American family Physician. Volume 72, Number 10 , November 15, 2005

Page 28: Chest Pain Evaluation

•The Rouan decision rule reliably predicts which patients with chest pain & a normal or nonspecific electrocardiogram are at higher risk for MI

•However, 3% of patients initially diagnosed with a non-cardiac cause of chest pain suffer death or MI within 30 days of presentation.

•Patients with cardiac risk factors warrant close follow-up.

Page 29: Chest Pain Evaluation

•The Diehr diagnostic rule, uses 7 clinical findings to predict the likelihood of pneumonia .

•Other findings that suggest pneumonia include egophony& dullness to percussion, but their absence does not rule out the diagnosis.

Page 30: Chest Pain Evaluation

•Well’s clinical decision rules for the diagnosis of PE consists of 7 signs & symptoms.

•The strength of the Wells model is that it does not require a CXR or ABG measurements. It relies on a careful history & physical examination.

Page 31: Chest Pain Evaluation
Page 32: Chest Pain Evaluation

Accuracy of chest pain diagnosis

using diagnostic & prognostic tests

Page 33: Chest Pain Evaluation

D-dimer* testing has become an important part of the evaluation for PE & deep venous thrombosis (DVT).

A low clinical suspicion for PE (Wells score <2) plus a normal quantitative ELISA D-dimer assay safely rules out PE, with a negative predictive value >99.5 %.

If further testing is needed, helical computed tomography (CT), combined with clinical suspicion and other testing such as lowerextremity venous ultrasound, can be used to rule in or rule out PE.

* Quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent antibody assay (ELISA) D-dimer assays are more sensitive & have been more thoroughly tested in clinical settings than whole-blood agglutination assays.

DIAGNOSTIC TESTING –PULMONARY EMBOLISM

Page 34: Chest Pain Evaluation

Summary

Although diagnostic tests are impressive, they should not replace the history & physical examination.Clinician decision rule can be given a point score to arrive at a pre-test probability of a disease & help rule in or out specific diagnoses.After history taking & physical examination, we formulate prior probability of the disease –decide as to whether no test, a screening test, or a definitive test should be performed.

Page 35: Chest Pain Evaluation

SummaryLikelihood ratios (LR) are a useful & practical way of expressing the power of diagnostic tests.An evidence-based approach tailors the diagnostic strategy to the patient - uses clinical evaluation to guide the selection of tests & their interpretation.

Page 36: Chest Pain Evaluation

“ Having cross the bridge of understanding, we still must cross the bridge to practice ”

Page 37: Chest Pain Evaluation

William E. Cayley, Jr., M.D., American Family Physician;Vol. 72/no. 10 (November 15, 2005)

Outpatient Diagnosis of Chest pain

Page 38: Chest Pain Evaluation