Active clinical trials for "Chest Pain"

Chest pain is the second leading reason for emergency department (ED) visits in the United States. Resource utilization for this ED subpopulation is particularly high, in part due to a dearth of accepted standardized clinical approaches and general overestimation of risk on the part of both providers and patients. This prospective observational cohort study seeks to address this issue by providing externally validated risk scores for major adverse cardiac events using a web-based clinical decision support platform (RISTRA) embedded within the electronic health record at 13 Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) EDs over a 12-month period. The decision support will provide risk estimates specific to the KPNC patient population. This studies hypothesis is that the provision of more accurate risk estimation for major adverse cardiac events will improve informed decision making by both providers and patients, resulting in less provocative testing and lower ED lengths of stay amongst low risk patients, as well as improving medical management among non-low risk patients and decreasing future rates of major adverse cardiac events.

Chest pain is a very common reason for resorting to the call center. The etiologies are very varied, ranging from benign pathologies to some that may involve, in the short term, the vital prognosis such as Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). ACS is a partial or complete occlusion of a coronary artery that causes potentially irreversible myocardial pain unless prompt treatment is undertaken. ACS represents 120 000 cases per year in France and causes about 18 000 deaths. There is currently no support score for the assessment of chest pain. However, reducing the duration of management of ACS is essential in order to hope to reduce the associated morbidity and mortality. In 2016, SAMU45's team established a predictive ACS score for the assessement of chest pain in SAMU 45 (France) based on the prospective study of 1367 patients. Seven items significantly associated with this risk of ACS could be highlighted: age, sex, smoking, typicality (potentially constrictive chest pain radiating potentially to the shoulders and / or jaw) pain, inaugural character of pain (ie first episode of this type), presence of sweats and the physician's belief to be in the presence of an ACS. These seven variables make up the SCARE score. This had good internal discrimination (AUC at 0.81) and excellent calibration ("p" of Hosmer-Lemeshow at 0.74). This score makes it possible to stratify the risk of ACS, by using epidemiological elements but also the physician's belief, whose Negative Predictive Value (VPN) proved excellent. The objective of this new project is to confirm by an external validation via a multicentric study the robustness of this score and thus be able to consider its use in front of any chest pain regulated in France by a call center.

Decision aids such as the HEART Pathway, Emergency Department Assessment of Chest Pain Score (EDACS), Revised Geneva Score and PERC Score have similar ability to accurately risk stratify Emergency Department (ED) patients with possible Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) and Pulmonary Embolism (PE) and have become standard practice in the ED setting. This study seeks to determine whether prehospital use of these decision aids is feasible and determine which are the most sensitive and specific for prediction of ACS and PE, respectively.

Multicentric, prospective, non-interventional observational study with two parts: A register of quality assurance within the recertification of clinics An extended register with scientific protocol.

This is a prospective observational study evaluating the diagnostic utility of cardiac ultrasound in patients who present to the emergency department with undifferentiated chest pain or shortness of breath. Emergency department providers will be interviewed before and after the completion of a cardiac ultrasound to determine if the ultrasound resulted in any changes in management. Other outcomes include determination of incidence of unexpected findings.

This multi-center, randomized, controlled trial conducted in Emergency Departments (ED) compares computed tomography (CT) coronary angiography with the traditional approach (usual care) for low- to intermediate-risk chest pain patients. The primary objective is to estimate the rate of major cardiac events (heart attack or cardiac death) within 30 days in trial participants in Group B who were not found to have significant coronary artery disease by CT coronary angiography. Additional evaluations will comprise health care utilization assessments, including length of hospital stay and re-admissions, cost analysis, and 1-year post-triage/presentation major cardiac event rates.

To investigate whether the use of Corus CAD (Age/Sex/Gene Expression score - ASGES) blood assay changes the diagnostic testing pattern in patients referred to a cardiologist for the evaluation of chest pain or anginal equivalent symptoms.

Exertional angina is common symptom in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) without obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Although reduced myocardial flow reserve is one of the proposed explanations for angina, little is known about the pathophysiology. This study aimed that adenosine-stress cardiac magnetic resonance can be used for the assessment of myocardial perfusion reserve and suggest the pathophysiology of development of angina in patients with severe AS without obstructive CAD.

Our research will examine whether the presence or absence of serial electrocardiogram (ECG) changes aids in reclassifying participants' risk for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) over and above serial blood testing.

The purpose of this study is to understand the use of Corus CAD also known as Age/Sex/Gene Expression score (ASGES) in the clinical decision making process of patients who underwent the evaluation of chest pain or anginal equivalent symptoms. Specifically, to better understand whether the use of the assay in clinical decision making resulted in changes in noninvasive diagnostic test ordering or diagnostic yield of additional tests ordered and/or invasive angiography.