Consistency evaluation of target heart rate determined by anaerobic threshold and by resting heart rate in patients with coronary artery disease after percutaneous coronary intervention / 中华心血管病杂志

Objective: To evaluate the consistency on the determination of target heart rate by simple calculation method based on resting heart rate and by anaerobic threshold method in cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) for patients with coronary artery disease after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: This study was a diagnostic test. Patients with coronary artery disease who underwent the first PCI in the Department of Cardiology of Peking University People's Hospital from October 2011 to April 2021 were enrolled. Patients were further divided into subgroups according to gender, age (<60 years group and ≥60 years group), with or without myocardial infarction history (myocardial infarction group and angina pectoris group) and whether β blockers were applied. The general clinical data of patients, resting heart rate (RHR) and anaerobic threshold heart rate in CPET were collected through the electronic medical record system. The simple target rate (RHR plus 20 or 30 bpm) and the target rate calculated by anaerobic threshold (anaerobic threshold heart rate minus 10 bpm) were both calculated in each patient. Consistency test of target heart rate derived by above the two methods was shown by intra-class correlation (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots. Results: A total of 439 patients were included, age was (56.2±8.8) years, body mass index was (25.77±2.34) kg/m2, there were 382 males (87.0%). The target heart rate determined by anaerobic threshold method was (90.0±11.8)bpm, and the simple target heart rate determined by RHR plus 20 bpm was (91.0±8.4)bpm. There was no significant difference on the target heart rate derived from the two calculation methods (P=0.091). The simple target heart rate determined by RHR plus 30 bpm was (101.0±8.4)bpm, which was significant higher than that determined by anaerobic threshold method (P<0.001). In the following analysis, RHR plus 20 bpm was defined as the simple target heart rate. The ICC value of target heart rate determined by anaerobic threshold and resting rate plus 20 bpm was 0.529(95%CI 0.458-0.593, P<0.001). Bland-Altman plots analysis showed that the ratio of the simple target heart rate and the target heart rate determined by anaerobic threshold method was 1.03±0.11 and the 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were 0.812-1.245. In the subgroup of patients aged<60 years (n=247), the ICC value was 0.492, the ratio by Bland-Altman plots analysis was 1.02±0.11 and LOA was 0.814-1.234; in the subgroup of patients aged ≥60 years (n=192), the ICC value was 0.566, the ratio by Bland-Altman plots analysis was 1.03±0.11 and LOA was 0.810-1.260. In male subgroup(n=382), the ICC value was 0.540, the ratio by Bland-Altman plots analysis was 1.03±0.11 and LOA was 0.813-1.246; in female subgroup(n=57), the ICC value was 0.445, the ratio by Bland-Altman plots analysis was 1.03±0.11 and LOA was 0.810-1.240.In myocardial infarction subgroup (n=186), the ICC value was 0.568, the ratio by Bland-Altman plots analysis was 1.02±0.11 and LOA was 0.810-1.227; in angina pectoris subgroup (n=253), the ICC value was 0.495, the ratio by Bland-Altman plots analysis was 1.04±0.11 and LOA was 0.813-1.260. In the subgroup of patients with β blockers (n=353), the ICC value was 0.520, the ratio by Bland-Altman plots analysis was 1.03±0.11 and LOA was 0.810-1.252; in the subgroup of patients without β blockers (n=86), the ICC value was 0.570, the ratio by Bland-Altman plots analysis was 1.02±0.10 and LOA was 0.821-1.219. Conclusions: The simple target heart rate determined by RHR plus 20 bpm is consistent with the target heart rate determined by anaerobic threshold in patients with coronary artery disease after PCI. But the simple target heart rate determined by RHR plus 20 bpm can't replace the target heart rate determined by anaerobic threshold in this patient cohort.

Diagnostic value of D-dimer combined with Wells score for suspected pulmonary embolism / 北京大学学报(医学版)

OBJECTIVE@#To evaluate the value of conventional and age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value combined with 2-level Wells score for diagnosis of suspected pulmonary embolism.@*METHODS@#In the study, 335 patients with suspected pulmonary embolism who visited Peking University People's Hospital were enrolled retrospectively, then 274 patients with age over fifty years were chosen. The 2-level Wells score was applied to evaluate the clinical probability of pulmonary embolism, the diagnostic value of traditional D-dimer cut-off value (500 μg/L) and age adjusted D-dimer cut-off value (age×10 μg/L above 50 years) combined with Wells score no greater than 4 were compared. Computed tomography pulmonary arteriography (CTPA) was considered as the gold standard for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism.@*RESULTS@#(1) The area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) in analysis of the combination of Wells score no greater than 4 and traditional D-dimer cut-off value was 0.764 (95%CI: 0.703-0.818). On the other hand, the AUC in a ROC analysis of the combination of Wells Score no greater than 4 and age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value was 0.814 (95%CI:0.756-0.863). These two results did not differ statistically (Z=0.05, P=0.121). (2) The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and Youden index of the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism of the combination of traditional D-dimer cut-off value and 2-level Wells Score were 100%, 48.9%, 28.8%, 100%, and 0.49, respectively. Meanwhile, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and Youden index of the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism of the combination of age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value and 2-level Wells Score were 97.4%, 62.3%, 35.5%, 99.1%, and 0.60, respectively. Compared with using traditional D-dimer cut-off value, using age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value could improve the diagnosis specificity (traditional D-dimer cut-off value group: 48.9%, age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value group: 62.3%) of pulmonary embolism without reducing the sensitivity (traditional D-dimer cut-off value group: 100%, age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value group: 99.1%). (3) Among the 222 patients with Wells Score no greater than 4, 90 patients were with D-dimer less than traditional cut-off value (500 μg/L), and 25 patients (account for 11.3% of all 222 patients) were with D-dimer between traditional cut-off value and age-adjusted cut-off value.@*CONCLUSION@#The application of age-adjusted D-dimer cut-off value can improve the diagnostic specificity of pulmonary embolism in patients over 50 years, without reducing the sensitivity. It can be used for ruling out suspected pulmonary embolism safely.

Values of the Wells and revised Geneva scores combined with D-dimer in diagnosing elderly pulmonary embolism patients / 中华医学杂志(英文版)

<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>Pulmonary embolism (PE) can be difficult to diagnose in elderly patients because of the coexistent diseases and the combination of drugs that they have taken. We aimed to compare the clinical diagnostic values of the Wells score, the revised Geneva score and each of them combined with D-dimer for suspected PE in elderly patients.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Three hundred and thirty-six patients who were admitted for suspected PE were enrolled retrospectively and divided into two groups based on age (≥65 or <65 years old). The Wells and revised Geneva scores were applied to evaluate the clinical probability of PE, and the positive predictive values of both scores were calculated using computed tomography pulmonary arteriography as a gold standard; overall accuracy was evaluated by the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operator characteristic curve; the negative predictive values of D-dimer, the Wells score combined with D-dimer, and the revised Geneva score combined with D-dimer were calculated.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Ninety-six cases (28.6%) were definitely diagnosed as PE among 336 cases, among them 56 cases (58.3%) were ≥65 years old. The positive predictive values of Wells and revised Geneva scores were 65.8% and 32.4%, respectively (P < 0.05) in the elderly patients; the AUC for the Wells score and the revised Geneva score in elderly was 0.682 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.612-0.746) and 0.655 (95% CI: 0.584-0.722), respectively (P = 0.389). The negative predictive values of D-dimer, the Wells score combined with D-dimer, and the revised Geneva score combined with D-dimer were 93.7%, 100%, and 100% in the elderly, respectively.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>The diagnostic value of the Wells score was higher than the revised Geneva score for the elderly cases with suspected PE. The combination of either the Wells score or the revised Geneva score with a normal D-dimer concentration is a safe strategy to rule out PE.</p>