The Medical Administration and Hospital Administration of the National Health Commission released the "2021 China Chest Pain Center Quality Control Report" in January 2022. This report analyzes the construction ratio of chest pain centers in the second-level and above medical institutions nationwide in 2021 and the construction of standard and basic chest pain centers, mainly from the way of coming to the hospital, symptom onset to first medical contact time, door to wire time, reperfusion therapy ratio, in-hospital mortality, proportion of discharges with medication recommended by the guidelines and average length and cost of hospital stay of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients to comprehensively describe the current status of the construction of the national chest pain centers. This article interprets the report in detail by reviewing relevant literature.
ObjectivesTo systematically review clinical values of multi-slice spiral computed tomography angiography (MSCTA) in diagnosis of chest pain triple (CPT).MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, CBM, VIP and WanFang Data databases were searched to collect diagnostic tests on CPT diagnosed by MSCTA from inception to October 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed by Stata 12.0 software. The pooled weighted Sen, Spe, +LR, -LR, and the DOR were calculated, SROC and AUC were drawn.ResultsA total of 11 diagnostic studies were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the pooled Sen, Spe, +LR, -LR, DOR and AUC of MSCTA for diagnosing CPT were 0.95 (95%CI 0.91 to 0.98), 0.97 (95%CI 0.94 to 0.98), 31.24 (95%CI 15.63 to 62.43), 0.05 (95%CI 0.02 to 0.10), 659.04 (95%CI 236.73 to 1 834.71) and 0.99 (95%CI 0.98 to 1.00), respectively.ConclusionsMSCTA has high sensibility and specificity for diagnosing CPT. Due to limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high-quality studies are required to verify the above conclusion.
Objective To explore the clinical features and diagnostic procedure of atypical asthma characteristic of chest pain.Methods The patients with unexplained chest pain were screened by lung function test and bronchial provocation test.The diagnosis of asthma was established by therapeutic test and exclusive procedure.The clinical manifestations were analyzed.Results In 56 cases of unexplained chest pain 20 cases were diagnosed as asthma.While all patients referred to clinic with chest pain as chief complaint，a majority of patients (11 cases，85%) showed obscure chest tightness，breath shortness and cough..Some cases reported the same trigger factors as asthma.Chest pain was relieved in all cases after regular antiasthma treatments.Conclusions Chest pain could be a specific presentation of asthma which may be misdiagnosed as other diseases.Bronchial provocation tests and antiasthma therapy should be considered to screen and diagnose this atypical asthma.
The American Heart Association and other six major associations jointly released AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain for the first report on October 28th, 2021. This guideline stresses the risk stratification and the diagnostic workup of acute chest pain, considers the cost-effectiveness of low-risk chest pain diagnosis and examination, and recommends sharing decisions with patients. This guideline mainly involves the initial evaluation of chest pain, choosing the right pathway with patient-centric algorithms for acute chest pain, and the evaluation of patients with stable chest pain. This review makes a detailed interpretation of the recommended points of the guideline through reviewing the literature.
ObjectiveTo explore the effect of continuous improvement of quality control system on the emergency treatment efficiency for patients with acute ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) after the establishment of Chest Pain Center. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the differences of theory examination scores acquired by the Chest Pain Center staff one month before and after they got the system training. Moreover, we designated the STEMI patients treated between May and August 2015 after the establishment of Chest Pain Center but before optimization of process to group A (n=70), and patients treated from September to December 2015 after optimization of process to group B (n=55). Then we analyzed the differences between these two groups in terms of the time from patients' arriving to registration, the time from arriving to first order, the length of stay in Emergency Department, and even the time from door to balloon (D2B). ResultsThe scores acquired by Chest Pain Center staff before and after system training were 69.89±6.34 and 87.09±4.39 respectively, with a significant difference (P＜0.05). All the time indicators of both group A and group B were shown as median and quartile. The time from patients' arriving to registration of group A and group B was 6.0 (0.0, 11.0) minutes and 1.0 (0.0, 3.0) minutes (P＜0.05); the time from arriving to first order was 12.8 (9.0, 18.0) minutes and 5.0 (3.0, 9.0) minutes (P＜0.05); the length of stay in Emergency Department was 54.0 (44.0,77.0) minutes and 33.0 (20.0, 61.0) minutes (P＜0.05); and the time of D2B was 107.5 (89.0, 130.0) minutes and 79.0 (63.0, 108.0) minutes (P＜0.05). ConclusionAfter taking measures such as drawing lessons from the past, training staff and optimizing process continuously, we have significantly shortened the acute STEMI patients' length of stay in the Emergency Department, which has saved more time for the following rescue of STEMI patients.