Guideline adherence in the use of coronary angiography in patients presenting at the emergency department without myocardial infarction – Results from the German ENLIGHT-KHK project

Résumé fourni par la source

Background: For patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), direct coronary angiography (CA) is recommended, while for non-AMI patients, the diagnostic work-up depends on clinical criteria. This analysis provides initial prospective German data for the degree of guideline-adherence (GL) in the use of CA on non-AMI patients presenting at the emergency department (ED) with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) according to the 2015 ESC-ACS-GL. Furthermore the implications of the application of the 2020 ESC-ACS-GL recommendations were evaluated. Methods: Patient symptoms were identified using a standardized questionnaire; medical history and diagnostic work-up were acquired from health records. In accordance with the 2015 ESC-ACS-GL, CA was considered GL-adherent if intermediate risk criteria (IRC) were present or non-invasive, image-guided testing (NIGT) was pathological. Results: Between January 2019 and August 2021, 229 patients were recruited across seven centers. Patients presented with chest pain, dyspnea, and other symptoms in 66.7%, 16.2% and 17.1%, respectively, were in mean 66.3 ± 10.5 years old, and 36.3% were female. In accordance with the 2015 ESC-ACS-GL, the use of CA was GL-adherent for 64.0% of the patients. GL-adherent compared to non-adherent use of CA resulted in revascularization more often (44.5% vs. 17.1%, p < 0.001). Applying the 2020 ESC-ACS-GL, 20.4% of CA would remain GL-adherent. Conclusions: In the majority of cases, the use of CA was adherent to the 2015 ESC-ACS-GL. With regard to the 2020 and 2023 ESC-ACS-GL, efforts to expand the utilization of NIGT are crucial, especially as GL-adherent use of CA is more likely to result in revascularization.(German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00015638; https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00015638; (registration date: 19 February 2019)).

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.