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
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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)).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".