Chest pain and ST-segment elevation in a patient with Duchenne muscular dystrophy, what really happened?

Introduction: Myocardial infarction is rare in children, if it occurs, findings are almost similar to adults. In Ouchenne muscular dystrophy (OMO), ST segment displacement associated with typical chest pain can occur. We report the case of a young boy with OMO presenting symptoms suggestive of myocardial ischemia. Case report: 7 year old boy, diagnosed with OMO, eoming to the emergency department with complaints of acute chest pain, dyspnoea and anxiety the night before. Clinical examination was not remarkable, with exception of findings of the OMO. ECG showed important ST-segment elevation in right precordial leads. Major increase in troponin 1 42.33 mcg/(normal, <0.04 mcg/I) was found. Echocardiography revealed slight yskinesia of postero-septal wall without decrease in ventricular function. As acute pain had happened more han 12 hours before referral and as the child was asymptomatic, he received anti-platelets therapy. The serum level of troponin 1 declined and the ECG normalised in a few days. Cardiac catheterization did not show any coronary anomaly or eardiac dysfunction. Cardiac biopsy revealed myocardial cell damaged compatible with OMO cardiomyopathy. Tc99m myocardial single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) did not show any radionuclide uptake defect. Conclusions: ln this particular context of children with OMO, the classical signs of myocardial ischemia could be misleading, standard investigation failed to demonstrate the cause of chest pain and inerease of troponin l, there was also no evidence of myocarditis. Role of late enhancement (LE) signal in eontrast-enhanced MRI in the understanding of the occurring process has to be evaluated.

Ruling out coronary heart disease in primary care patients with chest pain : a clinical prediction score

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Chest pain raises concern for the possibility of coronary heart disease. Scoring methods have been developed to identify coronary heart disease in emergency settings, but not in primary care. METHODS: Data were collected from a multicenter Swiss clinical cohort study including 672 consecutive patients with chest pain, who had visited one of 59 family practitioners' offices. Using delayed diagnosis we derived a prediction rule to rule out coronary heart disease by means of a logistic regression model. Known cardiovascular risk factors, pain characteristics, and physical signs associated with coronary heart disease were explored to develop a clinical score. Patients diagnosed with angina or acute myocardial infarction within the year following their initial visit comprised the coronary heart disease group. RESULTS: The coronary heart disease score was derived from eight variables: age, gender, duration of chest pain from 1 to 60 minutes, substernal chest pain location, pain increases with exertion, absence of tenderness point at palpation, cardiovascular risks factors, and personal history of cardiovascular disease. Area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was of 0.95 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.92; 0.97. From this score, 413 patients were considered as low risk for values of percentile 5 of the coronary heart disease patients. Internal validity was confirmed by bootstrapping. External validation using data from a German cohort (Marburg, n = 774) revealed a receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.72; 0.81) with a sensitivity of 85.6% and a specificity of 47.2%. CONCLUSIONS: This score, based only on history and physical examination, is a complementary tool for ruling out coronary heart disease in primary care patients complaining of chest pain.

Predictive ability of an early diagnostic guess in patients presenting with chest pain; a longitudinal descriptive study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The intuitive early diagnostic guess could play an important role in reaching a final diagnosis. However, no study to date has attempted to quantify the importance of general practitioners' (GPs) ability to correctly appraise the origin of chest pain within the first minutes of an encounter. METHODS: The validation study was nested in a multicentre cohort study with a one year follow-up and included 626 successive patients who presented with chest pain and were attended by 58 GPs in Western Switzerland. The early diagnostic guess was assessed prior to a patient's history being taken by a GP and was then compared to a diagnosis of chest pain observed over the next year. RESULTS: Using summary measures clustered at the GP's level, the early diagnostic guess was confirmed by further investigation in 51.0% (CI 95%; 49.4% to 52.5%) of patients presenting with chest pain. The early diagnostic guess was more accurate in patients with a life threatening illness (65.4%; CI 95% 64.5% to 66.3%) and in patients who did not feel anxious (62.9%; CI 95% 62.5% to 63.3%). The predictive abilities of an early diagnostic guess were consistent among GPs. CONCLUSIONS: The GPs early diagnostic guess was correct in one out of two patients presenting with chest pain. The probability of a correct guess was higher in patients with a life-threatening illness and in patients not feeling anxious about their pain.

Implementation study of a clinical prediction score to rule out cardiogenic chest pain in community: Cluster randomized trial

1.1 Fundamentals Chest pain is a common complaint in primary care patients (1 to 3% of all consultations) (1) and its aetiology can be miscellaneous, from harmless to potentially life threatening conditions. In primary care practice, the most prevalent aetiologies are: chest wall syndrome (43%), coronary heart disease (12%) and anxiety (7%) (2). In up to 20% of cases, potentially serious conditions as cardiac, respiratory or neoplasic diseases underlie chest pain. In this context, a large number of laboratory tests are run (42%) and over 16% of patients are referred to a specialist or hospitalized (2).¦A cardiovascular origin to chest pain can threaten patient's life and investigations run to exclude a serious condition can be expensive and involve a large number of exams or referral to specialist -­‐ often without real clinical need. In emergency settings, up to 80% of chest pains in patients are due to cardiovascular events (3) and scoring methods have been developed to identify conditions such as coronary heart disease (HD) quickly and efficiently (4-­‐6). In primary care, a cardiovascular origin is present in only about 12% of patients with chest pain (2) and general practitioners (GPs) need to exclude as safely as possible a potential serious condition underlying chest pain. A simple clinical prediction rule (CPR) like those available in emergency settings may therefore help GPs and spare time and extra investigations in ruling out CHD in primary care patients. Such a tool may also help GPs reassure patients with more common origin to chest pain.

Ruling out coronary heart disease in primary care patients with chest pain: a clinical prediction score.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Chest pain raises concern for the possibility of coronary heart disease. Scoring methods have been developed to identify coronary heart disease in emergency settings, but not in primary care. METHODS: Data were collected from a multicenter Swiss clinical cohort study including 672 consecutive patients with chest pain, who had visited one of 59 family practitioners' offices. Using delayed diagnosis we derived a prediction rule to rule out coronary heart disease by means of a logistic regression model. Known cardiovascular risk factors, pain characteristics, and physical signs associated with coronary heart disease were explored to develop a clinical score. Patients diagnosed with angina or acute myocardial infarction within the year following their initial visit comprised the coronary heart disease group. RESULTS: The coronary heart disease score was derived from eight variables: age, gender, duration of chest pain from 1 to 60 minutes, substernal chest pain location, pain increases with exertion, absence of tenderness point at palpation, cardiovascular risks factors, and personal history of cardiovascular disease. Area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was of 0.95 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.92; 0.97. From this score, 413 patients were considered as low risk for values of percentile 5 of the coronary heart disease patients. Internal validity was confirmed by bootstrapping. External validation using data from a German cohort (Marburg, n = 774) revealed a receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.72; 0.81) with a sensitivity of 85.6% and a specificity of 47.2%. CONCLUSIONS: This score, based only on history and physical examination, is a complementary tool for ruling out coronary heart disease in primary care patients complaining of chest pain.

Validation of a clinical prediction score for ruling out coronary heart disease in primary care patients with chest pain.

Background: A patient's chest pain raises concern for the possibility of coronary heart disease (CHD). An easy to use clinical prediction rule has been derived from the TOPIC study in Lausanne. Our objective is to validate this clinical score for ruling out CHD in primary care patients with chest pain. Methods: This secondary analysis used data collected from a oneyear follow-up cohort study attending 76 GPs in Germany. Patients attending their GP with chest pain were questioned on their age, gender, duration of chest pain (1-60 min), sternal pain location, pain increases with exertion, absence of tenderness point at palpation, cardiovascular risks factors, and personal history of cardiovascular disease. Area under the curve (ROC), sensitivity and specificity of the Lausanne CHD score were calculated for patients with full data. Results: 1190 patients were included. Full data was available for 509 patients (42.8%). Missing data was not related to having CHD (p = 0.397) or having a cardiovascular risk factor (p = 0.275). 76 (14.9%) were diagnosed with a CHD. Prevalence of CHD were respectively of 68/344 (19.8%), 2/62 (3.2%), 6/103 (5.8%) in the high, intermediate and low risk category. ROC was of 72.9 (CI95% 66.8; 78.9). Ruling out patients with low risk has a sensitivity of 92.1% (CI95% 83.0; 96.7) and a specificity of 22.4% (CI95% 18.6%; 26.7%). Conclusion: The Lausanne CHD score shows reasonably good sensitivity and can be used to rule out coronary events in patients with chest pain. Patients at risk of CHD for other rarer reasons should nevertheless also be investigated.

Biomarqueurs associés à la dyspnée et douleurs thoraciques: quelle utilité clinique [Biomarkers associated with dyspnea and chest pain: which cinical utility?].

Dyspnea and chest pain are typical reasons for consultations. biomarkers (CRP, procalcitonin, NT-proBNP, troponins, D-dimers) can have an interest for the diagnosis, the prognosis and the follow-up of several pathologies. There are however numerous pitfalls and limitations between the discovery of a biomarker and the utility in clinical practice. It is essential to always estimate a pre-test probability based on an attentive history and a careful physical examination, to know the intrinsic and extrinsic qualities of a test, and to determine a threshold of care. A biomarker should be used only if it modifies the patient's care and if it brings him a benefit compared to the patient who has no biomarker.

Chest pain in daily practice: occurrence, causes and management

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY: We assessed the occurrence and aetiology of chest pain in primary care practice. These features differ between primary and emergency care settings, where most previous studies have been performed. METHODS: 59 GPs in western Switzerland recorded all consecutive cases presenting with chest pain. Clinical characteristics, laboratory tests and other investigations as well as the diagnoses remaining after 12 months of follow-up were systematically registered. RESULTS: Among 24,620 patients examined during a total duration of 300 weeks of observation, 672 (2.7%) presented with chest pain (52% female, mean age 55 +/- 19(SD)). Most cases, 442 (1.8%), presented new symptoms and in 356 (1.4%) it was the reason for consulting. Over 40 ailments were diagnosed: musculoskeletal chest pain (including chest wall syndrome) (49%), cardiovascular (16%), psychogenic (11%), respiratory (10%), digestive (8%), miscellaneous (2%) and without diagnosis (3%). The three most prevalent diseases were: chest wall syndrome (43%), coronary artery disease (12%) and anxiety (7%). Unstable angina (6), myocardial infarction (4) and pulmonary embolism (2) were uncommon (1.8%). Potentially serious conditions including cardiac, respiratory and neoplasic diseases accounted for 20% of cases. A large number of laboratory tests (42%), referral to a specialist (16%) or hospitalisation (5%) were performed. Twentyfive patients died during follow-up, of which twelve were for a reason directly associated with thoracic pain [cancer (7) and cardiac causes (5)]. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic pain was present in 2.7% of primary care consultations. Chest wall syndrome pain was the main aetiology. Cardio - vascular emergencies were uncommon. However chest pain deserves full consideration because of the occurrence of potentially serious conditions.

A simple score for estimating ischemic heart disease in patients with non-traumatic chest pain in primary care

Background: Modelling epidemiological knowledge in validated clinical scores is a practical mean of integrating EBM to usual care. Existing scores about cardiovascular disease have been largely developed in emergency settings, but few in primary care. Such a toll is needed for general practitioners (GP) to evaluate the probability of ischemic heart disease (IHD) in patients with non-traumatic chest pain. Objective: To develop a predictive model to use as a clinical score for detecting IHD in patients with non-traumatic chest-pain in primary care. Methods: A post-hoc secondary analysis on data from an observational study including 672 patients with chest pain of which 85 had IHD diagnosed by their GP during the year following their inclusion. Best subset method was used to select 8 predictive variables from univariate analysis and fitted in a multivariate logistic regression model to define the score. Reliability of the model was assessed using split-group method. Results: Significant predictors were: age (0-3 points), gender (1 point), having at least one cardiovascular risks factor (hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, smoking, family history of CVD; 3 points), personal history of cardiovascular disease (1 point), duration of chest pain from 1 to 60 minutes (2 points), substernal chest pain (1 point), pain increasing with exertion (1 point) and absence of tenderness at palpation (1 point). Area under the ROC curve for the score was of 0.95 (IC95% 0.93; 0.97). Patients were categorised in three groups, low risk of IHD (score under 6; n = 360), moderate risk of IHD (score from 6 to 8; n = 187) and high risk of IHD (score from 9-13; n = 125). Prevalence of IHD in each group was respectively of 0%, 6.7%, 58.5%. Reliability of the model seems satisfactory as the model developed from the derivation set predicted perfectly (p = 0.948) the number of patients in each group in the validation set. Conclusion: This clinical score based only on history and physical exams can be an important tool in the practice of the general physician for the prediction of ischemic heart disease in patients complaining of chest pain. The score below 6 points (in more than half of our population) can avoid demanding complementary exams for selected patients (ECG, laboratory tests) because of the very low risk of IHD. Score above 6 points needs investigation to detect or rule out IHD. Further external validation is required in ambulatory settings.

Precordial abscess inducing chest pain 20 years after surgical repair of a pentalogy of fallot.

A 25-year-old male asylum-seeker presented with chest pain, exertional dyspnea, and orthopnea 20 years after the surgical repair of a pentalogy of Fallot. An extracardiac mass compressing the right ventricle was subsequently detected and surgical decompression was performed to relieve the resulting right intraventricular hypertension. At operation, the mass proved to be a coagulase-negative, staphylococcal abscess. In addition, the removal of the mass unmasked a previously nonrecognized pulmonary outflow stenosis that required balloon dilatation and beta-blocker therapy. While infections are known to occur after sternotomy, the formation of an abscess in the anterior mediastinum several years after the intervention appears to be exceptional; this diagnosis came to mind only after the more common complications had been considered, e.g., pseudoaneurysm or pericardial hematoma. To our knowledge, this is the first report of an abscess in the anterior mediastinum that had probably formed over many years following a sternotomy, compressed the right ventricle and masked a pulmonary stenosis.

Efficiency of coronary artery disease screening guidelines in asymptomatic and atypical chest pain type 2 diabetic patients

RESUME Objectifs. Évaluer la prévalence de maladie coronarienne chez les patients diabétiques de type 2 asymptomatiques ou avec angor atypique selon les recommandations américaines de l'American Diabetes Association et de l'American College of Cardiology. Méthodes. Cent cinquante-quatre patients diabétiques de type 2 asymptomatiques ou avec angor atypique et présentant au minimum 2 facteurs de risque cardio-vasculaires additionnels ont été dépistés par échocardiographie de stress (71%, n=109), scintigraphie myocardique de perfusion (26%, n=40) ou l'association des 2 examens (3%, n=5). Résultats. L'échocardiographie de stress s'est révélée positive chez 16 patients (14%) et 14 ont eu une coronarographie révélant des sténoses significatives chez 12 (86%). La scintigraphie myocardique de perfusion était positive chez 16 patients (36%). Huit patients ont eu une coronarographie et 4 (50%) présentaient des sténoses significatives. Au total, 31 patients (20%) ont montré des signes d'ischémie lors de l'examen non-invasif et 15 (10%) ont présenté des sténoses significatives à la coronarographie. Les facteurs prédictifs indépendants de la maladie coronarienne étaient le tabagisme (OR 6.5, p=0.05), la microalbuminurie (OR 3.9, p=0.03), ainsi que les souffles fémoraux (OR 17.1, p=0.008). Conclusions. En suivant les recommandations américaines, un patient sur cinq présentait une ischémie lors des examens non-invasifs, tandis que 1 sur 10 avait des sténoses significatives à la coronarographie. L'analyse multivariée suggère que des marqueurs des complications micro- et macro-vasculaires en combinaison avec des facteurs de risque cardio-vasculaire classiques pourraient améliorer le pouvoir diagnostic de ces recommandations. SUMMARY Aims. We evaluated the prevalence of coronary artery disease in asymptomatic and atypical chest pain type 2 diabetic patients according to the American Diabetes Association and American College of Cardiology guidelines. Methods. Asymptomatic or atypical chest pain type 2 diabetic patients (n=154), with at least two additional cardiovascular risk factors, were screened for coronary artery disease using stress echocardiography (71%, n=109), myocardial perfusion imaging (26%, n=40) or both (3%, n=5). Results. Stress echocardiography was positive in 16 patients (14%) and 14 had a coronary angiography, revealing significant stenoses in 12 (86%). Myocardial perfusion imaging was positive in 16 patients (36%). Eight patients underwent angiography and 4 (50%) presented significant stenoses. Overall, 31 patients (20%) demonstrated signs of ischemia on non-invasive tests and 15 (10%) presented significant stenoses on coronary angiography. Independent predictors of coronary artery disease were smoking (OR 6.5, p=0.05), microalbuminuria (OR 3.9, p=0.03) and femoral murmur (OR 17.1, p=0.008). Conclusions. Following the guidelines, one in five diabetic patient presented ischemia on noninvasive tests, while one in ten presented significant coronary stenoses. Multivariate analysis suggests that adding markers of micro- and macro-vascular complications to classical cardiovascular risk factors may enhance the diagnostic efficiency of the guidelines.

Significance of an isolated new right bundle branch block in a patient with chest pain.

Chest pain is a common presenting symptom in emergency departments, and a typical manifestation of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Recognition of ECG changes in AMI is essential for timely diagnosis and treatment. Right bundle branch block (RBBB) may be an isolated sign of AMI, and was previously considered as a criterion for fibrinolytic therapy. Since the most recent European Society of Cardiology and American Heart Association guidelines in 2013, RBBB alone is no longer considered a diagnostic criterion of AMI, even if it occurs in the context of acute chest pain, as RBBB does not usually interfere with the interpretation of ST-segment alteration. Our case illustrates an acute septal myocardial infarction with an isolated RBBB, and thus the importance of recognising this pattern in order to permit timely diagnosis and treatment.