• Juraj Hrecko, Jiri Dokoupil, and Radek Pudil.
• Bratisl Med J. 2022 Jan 1; 123 (4): 282-290.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and effectiveness of different strategies for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the elderly in real-life clinical practice.MethodsPatients older than 70 years presenting to the emergency department with chest pain were included. The performance of six decision aid rules (T-MACS, HEART, EDACS, TIMI, GRACE, and ADAPT) and solo troponin T strategy for diagnosing AMI was evaluated by calculating sensitivity, specificity, odds ratios, negative and positive predictive values.ResultsA total of 250 patients, with a mean age of 78.5 years, were enrolled. Forty-eight patients (19.2 %) had an acute myocardial infarction in a 30 day follow-up period. The sensitivity for ruling-out AMI was 100 % for T-MACS, HEART, and ADAPT; 97.9 % for EDACS, 93.8 % for TIMI, and 81.3 % for GRACE and solo TnT strategy. For ruling-in AMI, the specificity was 97.5 % for T-MACS, 95 % for TIMI, 83.2 % for HEART, 81.7 % for GRACE, and 46 % for ADAPT.ConclusionT-MACS decision aid had the best performance for rule-out and rule-in diagnostics of AMI. Risk stratification of patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome based on decision aid rules can be used in real-life practice, even in the population of the elderly (Tab. 6, Fig. 1, Ref. 17).

11 keywords...

hide…