Diagnostic accuracy of signs and symptoms in acute coronary syndrome and acute myocardial infarction<subtitle>A diagnostic meta-analysis</subtitle>

Abstract

Background Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) account for a large portion of cardiovascular deaths. Signs and symptoms for these syndromes, such as chest pain, are non-specific and can be caused by a variety of non-cardiac conditions, especially in low-prevalence settings such as general practice. The diagnostic value of these signs and symptoms can be assessed using diagnostic meta-analyses, but the last one dates from 2012.Methods We performed a diagnostic meta-analysis in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase and CENTRAL from 2006 to 2024. We included studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of thirteen different signs and symptoms. We divided patients into two subgroups (AMI and ACS) on which analysis was performed independently.Results We selected 24 articles for inclusion. Our analysis indicates that signs and symptoms have a limited role in the diagnosis of AMI or ACS. The most useful (highest diagnostic odds ratios, DOR) in the diagnosis of AMI were pain radiating to both arms (DOR 2.95 (95%CI 1.57–5.06)), absence of chest wall tenderness (DOR 3.51 (95%CI 1.64–6.61)), pain radiating to the right arm (DOR 5.17 (95%CI 1.77–11.9)) and sweating (DOR 5.75 (95%CI 2.51–11.4)). For ACS these were pain radiating to the right arm (DOR 3.9 (95%CI 0.7–12.6)) and absence of chest wall tenderness (DOR 7.73 (95%CI 2.19–19.8)).Conclusion We report the accuracy of thirteen signs and symptoms in the diagnosis of AMI and ACS. These can be useful to calibrate general practitioners’ diagnostic assessment of chest pain in primary care settings.

Keywords

• Acute coronary syndrome
• diagnosis
• signs
• symptoms
• meta-analysis
• acute myocardial infarction