Background: This study aims to determine the relationship between troponin levels and 30- and 90-day mortality rates in patients who applied to emergency service with paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia. Materials and methods: The data of our study were obtained from the retrospective screening of the files of 321 patients who applied to the emergency department between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2016 with International Classification of Diseases diagnosis with I47.1 (supraventricular tachycardia). Unstable patients, patients under 18 years, and patients with comorbidities that could increase troponin levels did not participate in the study. A total of 159 patients diagnosed with paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia were included in the study. These patients’ files were examined, and their examination and anamnesis information at the time of admission to hospital, demographic characteristics, and applied treatments were analyzed. The 30- and 90-day mortality rates of the patients were examined. Results: The study was carried out with 159 patients. Troponin was positive in 25 (15.7%) cases, while it was negative in 134 (84.3%) cases. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of 30- and 90-day mortality rates. Coronary artery disease was found to be higher in patients with positive troponin than patients with negative troponin. Conclusion: No significant difference was found between patients with positive troponin values compared to patients with negative troponin values in terms of 30- and 90-day mortality rates. We believe that prospective observational studies or large-scale retrospective studies will better elucidate this issue.
Background:
The aim of our study is to evaluate whether the CURB-65 or expanded-CURB-65 score can be used in healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) and subgroups of HCAP patients at the same efficiency. Thirty and 90-day mortality rates of the patients and predictive values of CURB-65 and E-CURB-65 scores were compared.
Patients and Methods:
This is a retrospective study of patients who presented to the Emergency Department between January 2015 and January 2016. All patient charts above 18 years of age were evaluated according to American Thoracic Society and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (ATS/IDSA) pneumonia diagnostic criteria and pneumonia diagnoses were confirmed.
Results:
167 pneumonia patients (27.8%) of all pneumonia cases were grouped as HCAP and 433 (54.4%) were grouped as community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). 43% (n = 72) of HCAP patients were classified as nursing home-associated pneumonia (NHAP) and 57% (n = 95) were classified as HCAP (except NHAP) group. NHAP patients were older than the other groups. HCAP (except NHAP) group had somehow more comorbid diseases when compared with the other groups. However, the NHAP group had more unstable vital signs and confusion rates. Hospital and ICU admissions, 30–90-day mortality rates were all significantly higher in NHAP group E-CURB-65 was found to have better predictive values than CURB-65 for 30-day and 90-day mortalities overall.
Conclusion:
According to our results, commonly used scoring systems, CURB 65 and E-CURB 65, are not suitable for HCAP, NHAP, and HCAP (except NHAP) patients. NHAP patients have significant worse prognosis compared with CAP and HCAP (except NHAP) in terms of admission to intensive care and 30 and 90-day mortality rates.
This article is available in open access under Creative Common Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license, allowing to download articles and share them with others as long as they credit the authors and the publisher, but without permission to change them in any way or use them commercially.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.