Clinical event adjudication: Unstable angina requiring hospitalization: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
m (Robot: Automated text replacement (-mgibson@perfuse.org +charlesmichaelgibson@gmail.com & -kfeeney@perfuse.org +kfeeney@elon.edu)) |
||
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Editors-in-Chief:''' [[C. Michael Gibson]], M.S., M.D. [mailto: | '''For the list of clinical event adjudication definitions, click [[Clinical event adjudication|here]]''' | ||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
'''Editors-in-Chief:''' [[C. Michael Gibson]], M.S., M.D. [mailto:charlesmichaelgibson@gmail.com] | |||
{{SI}} | {{SI}} |
Latest revision as of 14:37, 1 November 2012
For the list of clinical event adjudication definitions, click here
Editors-in-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]
This chapter presents unstable angina requiring hospitalization definitions used in the Clinical Event Committee adjudication processes. These definitions are current as of 3/26/10.
Unstable angina requiring hospitalization
Unstable angina requiring hospitalization is defined as:
- Symptoms of myocardial ischemia at rest (chest pain or equivalent) or an accelerating pattern of angina with frequent episodes associated with progressively decreased exercise capacity
AND - Prompting an unscheduled visit to a healthcare facility and hospitalization (including chest pain observation units) within 24 hours of the most recent symptoms
AND - At least one of the following:
- a. New or worsening ST or T wave changes on resting ECG
- ST elevation
New ST elevation at the J point in two anatomically contiguous leads with the cut-off points: ≥ 0.2 mV in men (> 0.25 mV in men < 40 years) or ≥ 0.15 mV in women in leads V2-V3 and/or ≥ 0.1 mV in other leads. - ST depression and T-wave changes
New horizontal or down-sloping ST depression ≥ 0.05 mV in two contiguous leads; and/or new T inversion ≥ 0.1 mV in two contiguous leads.
- ST elevation
- The above ECG criteria illustrate patterns consistent with myocardial ischemia. It is recognized that lesser ECG abnormalities may represent an ischemic response and may be accepted under the category of abnormal ECG findings.
- b. Definite evidence of myocardial ischemia on myocardial scintigraphy (clear reversible perfusion defect), stress echocardiography (reversible wall motion abnormality), or MRI (myocardial perfusion deficit under pharmacologic stress) that is believed to be responsible for the myocardial ischemic symptoms/signs
- c. Angiographic evidence of ≥ 70% lesion and/or thrombus in an epicardial coronary artery that is believed to be responsible for the myocardial ischemic symptoms/signs
- d. Need for coronary revascularization procedure (PCI or CABG) during the same hospital stay. This criterion would be fulfilled if the admission for myocardial ischemia led to transfer to another institution for the revascularization procedure without interceding home discharge
AND
- a. New or worsening ST or T wave changes on resting ECG
- 4. No evidence of acute myocardial infarction
General Considerations
- Escalation of pharmacotherapy for ischemia, such as intravenous nitrates or increasing dosages of β-blockers, should be considered supportive of the diagnosis of unstable angina. However, a typical presentation and admission to the hospital with escalation of pharmacotherapy, without any of the additional findings listed under category 3, would be insufficient alone to support classification as hospitalization for unstable angina.
- If subjects are admitted with suspected unstable angina, and subsequent testing reveals a non-cardiac or non-ischemic etiology, this event should not be recorded as hospitalization for unstable angina. Potential ischemic events meeting the criteria for myocardial infarction should not be adjudicated as unstable angina.
- Planned rehospitalization for performance of an elective revascularization in the absence of symptoms at rest prompting admission should not be considered a hospitalization for unstable angina. For example, a patient with stable exertional angina whose admission for coronary angiography and PCI is prompted by a positive outpatient stress test should not be considered a hospitalization for unstable angina.
- A patient who undergoes an elective catheterization where incidental coronary artery disease is found and who subsequently undergoes coronary revascularization will not be considered as meeting the hospitalization for unstable angina endpoint.
References
- ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Unstable Angina/Non ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction): Developed in Collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons: Endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, Circulation, 2007, 116:803-877.
- Campeau L, Grading of angina pectoris (letter), Circulation, 1976, 54:522-23.
- Cutlip DE, S Windecker, R Mehran, A Boam, DJ Cohen, G-A van Es, PG Steg, M-A Morel, L Mauri, P Vranckx, E McFadden, A Lansky, M Hamon, MW Krucoff, PW Serruys and on behalf of the Academic Research Consortium, Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials: A Case for Standardized Definitions, Circulation, 2007, 115:2344-2351.
- Easton JD, Saver JL, Albers GW, Alberts MJ, Chaturvedi S, Feldmann E, Hatsukami TS, Higashida RT, Johnston SC, Kidwell CS, Lutsep HL, Miller E, Sacco RL; Definition and Evaluation of Transient Ischemic Attack, A Scientific Statement for Healthcare Professionals from the American Heart Association; American Stroke Association Stroke Council; Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia; Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention; Council on Cardiovascular Nursing; and the Interdisciplinary Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease, Stroke, 2009 Jun; 40(6):2276-93. Epub 2009 May 7. Review.
- Thygesen, Kristian, Alpert JS, White HD on behalf of the Joint ESC/ACCF/AHA/WHF Task Force for the Redefinition of Myocardial Infarction. Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction, Circulation, 2007, 116:1-20.