Prevalence, characteristics, and outcomes of patients presenting with cardiogenic unilateral pulmonary edema.

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic unilateral pulmonary edema (UPE) is a rare entity, frequently leading to initial misdiagnosis. We sought to assess the prevalence of UPE and to determine its impact on prognosis compared with bilateral pulmonary edema. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied the characteristics and outcomes of patients admitted to our institution for cardiogenic pulmonary edema during an 8-year period. The study population included 869 consecutive patients. The prevalence of UPE was 2.1%: 16 right-sided UPE (89%) and 2 left-sided UPE (11%). In patients with UPE, blood pressure was significantly lower (P≤0.01), whereas noninvasive or invasive ventilation and catecholamines were used more frequently (P=0.0004 and P<0.0001, respectively). The prevalence of severe mitral regurgitation in patients with bilateral pulmonary edema and UPE was 6% and 100%, respectively (P<0.0001). In patients with UPE, use of antibiotic therapy and delay in treatment were significantly higher (P<0.0001 and P=0.003, respectively). In-hospital mortality was 9%: 39% for UPE versus 8% for bilateral pulmonary edema (odds ratio, 6.9; 95% confidence interval, 2.6 to 18; P<0.001). In multivariate analysis, unilateral location of pulmonary edema was independently related to death whatever the model used (adjusted odds ratio, 6.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.3 to 32; P=0.021 for model A; and adjusted odds ratio, 6.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 41; P=0.037 for model B). CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral pulmonary edema represented 2.1% of cardiogenic pulmonary edema in our study, usually appeared as an opacity involving the right lung, and was always associated with severe mitral regurgitation. Unilateral pulmonary edema is related to an independent increased risk of mortality and should be promptly recognized to avoid delays in treatment.

Performance assessment of a chest pain unit: Preliminary 2-year experience in the European Georges Pompidou Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Chest pain units (CPUs) are very popular in the USA for the triage of low-to-intermediate-risk chest pains. However, CPUs do not yet exist in France. AIMS: To determine the prevalence and clinical characteristics of patients admitted to a new CPU in France, and to assess the quality of care with regard to identification and exclusion of an acute coronary syndromes (ACS). METHODS: This prospective study included 906 consecutive patients with non-traumatic chest pain admitted to our CPU between September 2006 and August 2008. Patients were managed according to their probability of presenting with an ACS. Clinical characteristics, diagnostic tests, final diagnosis, destination and length of stay were recorded. We also assessed the 30-day outcome of patients in whom an ACS was excluded. RESULTS: Of the 906 patients, 27.9% had an ACS (1.3% with and 26.6% without ST-segment elevation, respectively). Non-ischaemic cardiac aetiologies and non-cardiac aetiologies were found in 123 (12.6%) and 63 (7.0%) patients, respectively. A final diagnosis of chest pain of undetermined origin was made in 51.5% of patients; among these, 17 (6.5%) patients were re-admitted to the CPU between September 2006 and September 2007. Thirty-day follow-up revealed that only one patient had subsequent confirmation of coronary artery disease requiring further hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study reports the first experience of a CPU in a cardiology department in France. Our preliminary results suggest that our CPU can exclude an ACS safely. Further studies are warranted to assess the value of CPUs in France.