Simplified Predictive Instrument to Rule Out Acute Coronary Syndromes in a High-Risk Population.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether diagnostic protocols based on cardiac markers to identify low-risk chest pain patients suitable for early release from the emergency department can be applied to patients older than 65 years or with traditional cardiac risk factors. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a single-center retrospective study of 231 consecutive patients with high-risk factor burden in which a first cardiac troponin (cTn) level was measured in the emergency department and a second cTn sample was drawn 4 to 14 hours later, we compared the performance of a modified 2-Hour Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol to Assess Patients with Chest Pain Using Contemporary Troponins as the Only Biomarker (ADAPT) rule to a new risk classification scheme that identifies patients as low risk if they have no known coronary artery disease, a nonischemic electrocardiogram, and 2 cTn levels below the assay's limit of detection. Demographic and outcome data were abstracted through chart review. The median age of our population was 64 years, and 75% had Thrombosis In Myocardial Infarction risk score ≥2. Using our risk classification rule, 53 (23%) patients were low risk with a negative predictive value for 30-day cardiac events of 98%. Applying a modified ADAPT rule to our cohort, 18 (8%) patients were identified as low risk with a negative predictive value of 100%. In a sensitivity analysis, the negative predictive value of our risk algorithm did not change when we relied only on undetectable baseline cTn and eliminated the second cTn assessment. CONCLUSIONS: If confirmed in prospective studies, this less-restrictive risk classification strategy could be used to safely identify chest pain patients with more traditional cardiac risk factors for early emergency department release.

Dual modulation of cell survival and cell death by beta(2)-adrenergic signaling in adult mouse cardiac myocytes.

The goal of this study was to determine whether beta(1)-adrenergic receptor (AR) and beta(2)-AR differ in regulating cardiomyocyte survival and apoptosis and, if so, to explore underlying mechanisms. One potential mechanism is that cardiac beta(2)-AR can activate both G(s) and G(i) proteins, whereas cardiac beta(1)-AR couples only to G(s). To avoid complicated crosstalk between beta-AR subtypes, we expressed beta(1)-AR or beta(2)-AR individually in adult beta(1)/beta(2)-AR double knockout mouse cardiac myocytes by using adenoviral gene transfer. Stimulation of beta(1)-AR, but not beta(2)-AR, markedly induced myocyte apoptosis, as indicated by increased terminal deoxynucleotidyltransferase-mediated UTP end labeling or Hoechst staining positive cells and DNA fragmentation. In contrast, beta(2)-AR (but not beta(1)-AR) stimulation elevated the activity of Akt, a powerful survival signal; this effect was fully abolished by inhibiting G(i), G(beta gamma), or phosphoinositide 3 kinase (PI3K) with pertussis toxin, beta ARK-ct (a peptide inhibitor of G(beta gamma)), or LY294002, respectively. This indicates that beta(2)-AR activates Akt via a G(i)-G(beta gamma)-PI3K pathway. More importantly, inhibition of the G(i)-G(beta gamma)-PI3K-Akt pathway converts beta(2)-AR signaling from survival to apoptotic. Thus, stimulation of a single class of receptors, beta(2)-ARs, elicits concurrent apoptotic and survival signals in cardiac myocytes. The survival effect appears to predominate and is mediated by the G(i)-G(beta gamma)-PI3K-Akt signaling pathway.

A prospective comparison of a noninvasive cardiac output monitor versus esophageal doppler monitor for goal-directed fluid therapy in colorectal surgery patients

Copyright © 2014 International Anesthesia Research Society.BACKGROUND: Goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) is associated with improved outcomes after surgery. The esophageal Doppler monitor (EDM) is widely used, but has several limitations. The NICOM, a completely noninvasive cardiac output monitor (Cheetah Medical), may be appropriate for guiding GDFT. No prospective studies have compared the NICOM and the EDM. We hypothesized that the NICOM is not significantly different from the EDM for monitoring during GDFT. METHODS: One hundred adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery participated in this study. Patients in phase I (n = 50) had intraoperative GDFT guided by the EDM while the NICOM was connected, and patients in phase II (n = 50) had intraoperative GDFT guided by the NICOM while the EDM was connected. Each patient's stroke volume was optimized using 250- mL colloid boluses. Agreement between the monitors was assessed, and patient outcomes (postoperative pain, nausea, and return of bowel function), complications (renal, pulmonary, infectious, and wound complications), and length of hospital stay (LOS) were compared. RESULTS: Using a 10% increase in stroke volume after fluid challenge, agreement between monitors was 60% at 5 minutes, 61% at 10 minutes, and 66% at 15 minutes, with no significant systematic disagreement (McNemar P > 0.05) at any time point. The EDM had significantly more missing data than the NICOM. No clinically significant differences were found in total LOS or other outcomes. The mean LOS was 6.56 ± 4.32 days in phase I and 6.07 ± 2.85 days in phase II, and 95% confidence limits for the difference were -0.96 to +1.95 days (P = 0.5016). CONCLUSIONS: The NICOM performs similarly to the EDM in guiding GDFT, with no clinically significant differences in outcomes, and offers increased ease of use as well as fewer missing data points. The NICOM may be a viable alternative monitor to guide GDFT.