Colleen Shortt1, Kim Phan2, Stephen A Hill1, Andrew Worster3, Peter A Kavsak4. 1. Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada. 2. McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. 3. Division of Emergency Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada. 4. Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada. Electronic address: kavsakp@mcmaster.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The application of "undetectable" high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) concentrations to "rule-out" myocardial infarction is appealing, but there are analytical concerns and a lack of consensus on what concentration should be used to define the lower reportable limit; i.e., limit of detection (LoD) or limit of blank. An alternative approach is to utilize a measurable hs-cTn concentration that identifies patients at low-risk for a future cardiovascular event combined with another prognostic test, such as glucose. We assessed both of these approaches in different emergency department (ED) cohorts to rule-out an event. DESIGN AND METHODS: We used cohort 1 (all-comer ED population, n=4773; derivation cohort) to determine the most appropriate approach at presentation (i.e., Dual Panel test: hs-cTn/glucose vs. LoD vs. LoD/glucose) for an early rule-out of hospital death using the Abbott ARCHITECT hs-cTnI assay. We used cohort 2 (n=144) and cohort 3 (n=127), both early chest pain onset ED populations as the verification datasets (outcome: composite cardiovascular event at 72h) with three hs-cTn assays assessed (Abbott Laboratories, Beckman Coulter, Roche Diagnostics). RESULTS: In cohort 1, the sensitivity was >99% for all three approaches; however the specificity (11%; 95% CI: 10-12%) was significantly higher for the Dual Panel as compared to the LoD approach (specificity=5%; 95% CI: 4-6%). Verification of the Dual Panel in cohort 2 and cohort 3 revealed 100% sensitivity and negative predictive values for all three hs-cTn assays. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of a "healthy" hs-cTn concentration with glucose might effectively rule-out patients for an acute cardiovascular event at ED presentation.
OBJECTIVES: The application of "undetectable" high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) concentrations to "rule-out" myocardial infarction is appealing, but there are analytical concerns and a lack of consensus on what concentration should be used to define the lower reportable limit; i.e., limit of detection (LoD) or limit of blank. An alternative approach is to utilize a measurable hs-cTn concentration that identifies patients at low-risk for a future cardiovascular event combined with another prognostic test, such as glucose. We assessed both of these approaches in different emergency department (ED) cohorts to rule-out an event. DESIGN AND METHODS: We used cohort 1 (all-comer ED population, n=4773; derivation cohort) to determine the most appropriate approach at presentation (i.e., Dual Panel test: hs-cTn/glucose vs. LoD vs. LoD/glucose) for an early rule-out of hospital death using the Abbott ARCHITECT hs-cTnI assay. We used cohort 2 (n=144) and cohort 3 (n=127), both early chest pain onset ED populations as the verification datasets (outcome: composite cardiovascular event at 72h) with three hs-cTn assays assessed (Abbott Laboratories, Beckman Coulter, Roche Diagnostics). RESULTS: In cohort 1, the sensitivity was >99% for all three approaches; however the specificity (11%; 95% CI: 10-12%) was significantly higher for the Dual Panel as compared to the LoD approach (specificity=5%; 95% CI: 4-6%). Verification of the Dual Panel in cohort 2 and cohort 3 revealed 100% sensitivity and negative predictive values for all three hs-cTn assays. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of a "healthy" hs-cTn concentration with glucose might effectively rule-out patients for an acute cardiovascular event at ED presentation.