This pilot study evaluates an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted electrocardiography (ECG) analysis system, QCG, to enhance urgent coronary angiography (CAG) decision-making for acute chest pain in the emergency department (ED). We retrospectively analyzed 300 ED cases, categorized as non-coronary chest pain (Group 1), acute coronary syndrome (ACS) without occlusive coronary artery disease (CAD) (Group 2), and ACS with occlusive CAD (Group 3). Six clinicians made urgent CAG decision using a conventional approach (clinical data and ECG) and a QCG-assisted approach (including QCG scores). The QCG-assisted approach improved correct CAG decisions in Group 2 (36.0% vs. 45.3%, P = 0.003) and Group 3 (85.3% vs. 90.0%, P = 0.017), with minimal impact in Group 1 (92.7% vs. 95.0%, P = 0.125). Diagnostic accuracy for ACS improved from 77% to 81% with QCG assistance and reached 82% with QCG alone, supporting AI's potential to enhance urgent CAG decisionmaking for ED chest pain cases.

This pilot study evaluates an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted electrocardiography (ECG) analysis system, QCG, to enhance urgent coronary angiography (CAG) decision-making for acute chest pain in the emergency department (ED). We retrospectively analyzed 300 ED cases, categorized as non-coronary chest pain (Group 1), acute coronary syndrome (ACS) without occlusive coronary artery disease (CAD) (Group 2), and ACS with occlusive CAD (Group 3). Six clinicians made urgent CAG decision using a conventional approach (clinical data and ECG) and a QCG-assisted approach (including QCG scores). The QCG-assisted approach improved correct CAG decisions in Group 2 (36.0% vs. 45.3%, P = 0.003) and Group 3 (85.3% vs. 90.0%, P = 0.017), with minimal impact in Group 1 (92.7% vs. 95.0%, P = 0.125). Diagnostic accuracy for ACS improved from 77% to 81% with QCG assistance and reached 82% with QCG alone, supporting AI's potential to enhance urgent CAG decisionmaking for ED chest pain cases.

This pilot study evaluates an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted electrocardiography (ECG) analysis system, QCG, to enhance urgent coronary angiography (CAG) decision-making for acute chest pain in the emergency department (ED). We retrospectively analyzed 300 ED cases, categorized as non-coronary chest pain (Group 1), acute coronary syndrome (ACS) without occlusive coronary artery disease (CAD) (Group 2), and ACS with occlusive CAD (Group 3). Six clinicians made urgent CAG decision using a conventional approach (clinical data and ECG) and a QCG-assisted approach (including QCG scores). The QCG-assisted approach improved correct CAG decisions in Group 2 (36.0% vs. 45.3%, P = 0.003) and Group 3 (85.3% vs. 90.0%, P = 0.017), with minimal impact in Group 1 (92.7% vs. 95.0%, P = 0.125). Diagnostic accuracy for ACS improved from 77% to 81% with QCG assistance and reached 82% with QCG alone, supporting AI's potential to enhance urgent CAG decisionmaking for ED chest pain cases.

This pilot study evaluates an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted electrocardiography (ECG) analysis system, QCG, to enhance urgent coronary angiography (CAG) decision-making for acute chest pain in the emergency department (ED). We retrospectively analyzed 300 ED cases, categorized as non-coronary chest pain (Group 1), acute coronary syndrome (ACS) without occlusive coronary artery disease (CAD) (Group 2), and ACS with occlusive CAD (Group 3). Six clinicians made urgent CAG decision using a conventional approach (clinical data and ECG) and a QCG-assisted approach (including QCG scores). The QCG-assisted approach improved correct CAG decisions in Group 2 (36.0% vs. 45.3%, P = 0.003) and Group 3 (85.3% vs. 90.0%, P = 0.017), with minimal impact in Group 1 (92.7% vs. 95.0%, P = 0.125). Diagnostic accuracy for ACS improved from 77% to 81% with QCG assistance and reached 82% with QCG alone, supporting AI's potential to enhance urgent CAG decisionmaking for ED chest pain cases.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the diagnostic validity of coronary computed tomography angiography (cCTA) in vasospastic angina (VA) and factors associated with discrepant results between invasive coronary angiography with the ergonovine provocation test (iCAG-EPT) and cCTA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of the 1397 patients diagnosed with VA from 2006 to 2016, 33 patients (75 lesions) with available cCTA data from within 6 months before iCAG-EPT were included. The severity of spasm (% diameter stenosis [%DS]) on iCAG-EPT and cCTA was assessed, and the difference in %DS (Δ%DS) was calculated. Δ%DS was compared after classifying the lesions according to pre-cCTA-administered sublingual nitroglycerin (SL-NG) or beta-blockers. The lesions were further categorized with %DS ≥ 50% on iCAG-EPT or cCTA defined as a significant spasm, and the diagnostic performance of cCTA on identifying significant spasm relative to iCAG-EPT was assessed. RESULTS: Compared to lesions without SL-NG treatment, those with SL-NG treatment showed a higher Δ%DS (39.2% vs. 22.1%, p = 0.002). However, there was no difference in Δ%DS with or without beta-blocker treatment (35.1% vs. 32.6%, p = 0.643). The significant difference in Δ%DS associated with SL-NG was more prominent in patients who were aged < 60 years, were male, had body mass index < 25 kg/m2, and had no history of hypertension, diabetes, or dyslipidemia. Based on iCAG-EPT as the reference, the per-lesion-based sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of cCTA for VA diagnosis were 7.5%, 94.0%, 60.0%, 47.1%, and 48.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: For patients with clinically suspected VA, confirmation with iCAG-EPT needs to be considered without completely excluding the diagnosis of VA simply based on cCTA results, although further prospective studies are required for confirmation.
Angina Pectoris, Variant ; Angiography ; Body Mass Index ; Constriction, Pathologic ; Coronary Angiography ; Diagnosis ; Dyslipidemias ; Ergonovine ; Humans ; Hypertension ; Male ; Nitroglycerin ; Prospective Studies ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Spasm

Background and Objectives: Antithrombotic therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) has changed in recent years with new data from large randomized trials and updates to clinical guidelines. This study aimed to investigate the trends in periprocedural antithrombotic regimens in Korean patients with AF undergoing PCI with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Methods: Using the claims database of the Health Insurance Review and Assessment during 2013–2018, 27,594 patients with AF undergoing PCI were identified. The annual prevalence of PCI and prescriptions of each antithrombotic agent, including antiplatelet agents and oral anticoagulants, within 30 days after PCI were investigated. Results: During 2013–2018, the number of patients with AF undergoing PCI increased up to 1.3-fold (from 3,913 to 5,075 patients per year). After the introduction of NOACs, the proportion of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) decreased from 71.9% to 49.8% but still occupied the largest proportion among antithrombotic regimens. Triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) use increased from 25.4% to 46.0%, and NOAC has rapidly replaced warfarin as the oral anticoagulant of choice. TAT was preferred to DAPT for patients with CHA2 DS2 -VASc score ≥2. Among various factors, prior intracranial hemorrhage was the most powerful predictor of favoring DAPT use over TAT. Conclusion Since the introduction of NOACs, the patterns of periprocedural antithrombotic regimens have changed rapidly toward more use of TAT, specifically with NOAC-based regimen. Appropriate stroke prevention with oral anticoagulants is still underutilized in patients with AF undergoing PCI in Korea.

Background and Objectives: Antithrombotic therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) has changed in recent years with new data from large randomized trials and updates to clinical guidelines. This study aimed to investigate the trends in periprocedural antithrombotic regimens in Korean patients with AF undergoing PCI with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Methods: Using the claims database of the Health Insurance Review and Assessment during 2013–2018, 27,594 patients with AF undergoing PCI were identified. The annual prevalence of PCI and prescriptions of each antithrombotic agent, including antiplatelet agents and oral anticoagulants, within 30 days after PCI were investigated. Results: During 2013–2018, the number of patients with AF undergoing PCI increased up to 1.3-fold (from 3,913 to 5,075 patients per year). After the introduction of NOACs, the proportion of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) decreased from 71.9% to 49.8% but still occupied the largest proportion among antithrombotic regimens. Triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) use increased from 25.4% to 46.0%, and NOAC has rapidly replaced warfarin as the oral anticoagulant of choice. TAT was preferred to DAPT for patients with CHA2 DS2 -VASc score ≥2. Among various factors, prior intracranial hemorrhage was the most powerful predictor of favoring DAPT use over TAT. Conclusion Since the introduction of NOACs, the patterns of periprocedural antithrombotic regimens have changed rapidly toward more use of TAT, specifically with NOAC-based regimen. Appropriate stroke prevention with oral anticoagulants is still underutilized in patients with AF undergoing PCI in Korea.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Aspirin plays an important role in the maintenance of graft patency and the prevention of thrombotic event after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). However, the use of preoperative aspirin is still under debate due to the risk of bleeding. METHODS: From PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Meta-analysis using random effect model was performed. RESULTS: We performed a systemic meta-analysis of 17 studies (12 randomized controlled studies and 5 non-randomized registries) which compared clinical outcomes of 9,101 patients who underwent CABG with or without preoperative aspirin administration. Preoperative aspirin increased chest tube drainage (weighted mean difference 177.4 mL, 95% confidence interval [CI], 41.3–313.4; p=0.011). However, the risk of re-operation for bleeding was not different between the preoperative aspirin group and the control group (3.2% vs. 2.4%; odds ratio [OR], 1.23; 95% CI, 0.94–1.60; p=0.102). There was no difference in the rates of all-cause mortality (1.6% vs. 1.5%; OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.64–1.49; p=0.920) and myocardial infarction (MI) (8.7% vs. 10.4%; OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.66–1.04; p=0.102) between patients with and without preoperative aspirin administration. CONCLUSIONS Although aspirin increased the amount of chest tube drainage, it was not associated with increased risk of re-operation for bleeding. In addition, the risks of early postoperative all-cause mortality and MI were not reduced by using preoperative aspirin.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Aspirin plays an important role in the maintenance of graft patency and the prevention of thrombotic event after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). However, the use of preoperative aspirin is still under debate due to the risk of bleeding. METHODS: From PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Meta-analysis using random effect model was performed. RESULTS: We performed a systemic meta-analysis of 17 studies (12 randomized controlled studies and 5 non-randomized registries) which compared clinical outcomes of 9,101 patients who underwent CABG with or without preoperative aspirin administration. Preoperative aspirin increased chest tube drainage (weighted mean difference 177.4 mL, 95% confidence interval [CI], 41.3–313.4; p=0.011). However, the risk of re-operation for bleeding was not different between the preoperative aspirin group and the control group (3.2% vs. 2.4%; odds ratio [OR], 1.23; 95% CI, 0.94–1.60; p=0.102). There was no difference in the rates of all-cause mortality (1.6% vs. 1.5%; OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.64–1.49; p=0.920) and myocardial infarction (MI) (8.7% vs. 10.4%; OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.66–1.04; p=0.102) between patients with and without preoperative aspirin administration. CONCLUSIONS: Although aspirin increased the amount of chest tube drainage, it was not associated with increased risk of re-operation for bleeding. In addition, the risks of early postoperative all-cause mortality and MI were not reduced by using preoperative aspirin.
Aspirin ; Chest Tubes ; Coronary Artery Bypass ; Coronary Vessels ; Drainage ; Hemorrhage ; Humans ; Mortality ; Myocardial Infarction ; Odds Ratio ; Transplants