Literature DB >> 33139388

Using the clinical chemistry score in the emergency department to detect adverse cardiac events: a diagnostic accuracy study.

Peter A Kavsak1, Joshua O Cerasuolo2, Dennis T Ko2, Jinhui Ma2, Jonathan Sherbino2, Shawn E Mondoux2, Natasha Clayton2, Stephen A Hill2, Matthew McQueen2, Lauren E Griffith2, Shamir R Mehta2, Richard Perez2, Hsien Seow2, P J Devereaux2, Andrew Worster2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The ability to rule out or in a major adverse cardiac event (MACE) in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome at emergency department (ED) presentation would be beneficial to patient care and the health care system. The clinical chemistry score (CCS) was evaluated in this context.
METHODS: This diagnostic accuracy study evaluated 2 different ED cohorts with suspected acute coronary syndrome. For patients in cohort 1, who presented to the ED of 3 hospitals in Hamilton, Ontario, between May and August 2013, retrospective measurements were taken using the Ortho Clinical Diagnostics high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) assay; for patients in cohort 2, who presented to the ED of the same 3 hospitals in Hamilton between November 2012 and February 2013, an ED cardiac presentation blood test panel was performed with the Abbott Diagnostics hs-cTnI assay. The sensitivity and specificity of the CCS (cut-offs of ≥ 1 and 5) and hs-cTnI alone (published cut-offs) were compared for MACE (composite of death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, revascularization) at 30 days for both cohorts and at 90 days for cohort 2.
RESULTS: The incidence of MACE at 30 days was higher in cohort 1 (n = 1058) (19.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 16.8%-22.2%) than in cohort 2 (n = 5974) (14.6%, 95% CI 13.6%-15.6%). In cohort 1, a CCS of 1 or above yielded a sensitivity of 99.5% (95% CI 97.3%-99.9%). The sensitivity with an Ortho hs-cTnI cut-off of 1 ng/L or above was 91.2% (95% CI 86.5%-95.7%). The specificity of a CCS of 5 (97.8%, 95% CI 96.5%-98.7%) was higher than when the overall 99th-percentile cut-off for the Ortho hs-cTnI assay (> 11 ng/L; 90.1%, 95% CI 87.9%-92.0%) was used. A similar pattern was observed in cohort 2 at 30 days and persisted at 90 days with the Abbott hs-cTnI assay.
INTERPRETATION: The CCS derived with 2 different hs-cTnI assays and ED populations yielded higher sensitivity and specificity estimates for MACE than hs-cTnI alone. An intervention study is needed to evaluate the impact of the CCS at both the patient and hospital levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01994577. Copyright 2020, Joule Inc. or its licensors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33139388      PMCID: PMC7608943          DOI: 10.9778/cmajo.20200047

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ Open        ISSN: 2291-0026


  37 in total

1.  Four Different High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin Assays With Important Analytical Performance Differences.

Authors:  Peter A Kavsak; Craig Ainsworth; Lorna Clark; P J Devereaux; Andrew Worster
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2019-03-19       Impact factor: 5.223

2.  Rule-In and Rule-Out of Myocardial Infarction Using Cardiac Troponin and Glycemic Biomarkers in Patients with Symptoms Suggestive of Acute Coronary Syndrome.

Authors:  Colleen Shortt; Jinhui Ma; Natasha Clayton; Jonathan Sherbino; Richard Whitlock; Guillaume Pare; Stephen A Hill; Matthew McQueen; Shamir R Mehta; P J Devereaux; Andrew Worster; Peter A Kavsak
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 8.327

3.  Analytical Variation and Abbott Diagnostics High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin I Risk Categories in Asymptomatic Individuals.

Authors:  Peter A Kavsak; Eleonora Petryayeva; Lorna Clark
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2019-08-19       Impact factor: 5.223

4.  Efficacy of High-Sensitivity Troponin T in Identifying Very-Low-Risk Patients With Possible Acute Coronary Syndrome.

Authors:  W Frank Peacock; Brigette M Baumann; Deborah Bruton; Thomas E Davis; Beverly Handy; Christopher W Jones; Judd E Hollander; Alexander T Limkakeng; Abhi Mehrotra; Martin Than; Andre Ziegler; Carina Dinkel
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 14.676

5.  A Multicenter Assessment of the Sensitivity and Specificity for a Single High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin Test at Emergency Department Presentation for Hospital Admission.

Authors:  Peter A Kavsak; Andrew McRae; Shabnam Vatanpour; Ola Z Ismail; Andrew Worster
Journal:  J Appl Lab Med       Date:  2019-07-31

6.  Clinical evaluation of Ortho Clinical Diagnostics high-sensitivity cardiac Troponin I assay in patients with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  Peter A Kavsak; Shawn E Mondoux; Jonathan Sherbino; Jinhui Ma; Natasha Clayton; Stephen A Hill; Matthew McQueen; Shamir R Mehta; Lauren E Griffith; P J Devereaux; Andrew Worster
Journal:  Clin Biochem       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 3.281

Review 7.  Clinical Policy: Critical Issues in the Evaluation and Management of Emergency Department Patients With Suspected Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes.

Authors:  Christian A Tomaszewski; David Nestler; Kaushal H Shah; Amita Sudhir; Michael D Brown
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 5.721

8.  Evaluation of the Siemens ADVIA Centaur high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assay in serum.

Authors:  Peter A Kavsak; Andrew Worster; Stephen A Hill; Allan S Jaffe
Journal:  Clin Chim Acta       Date:  2018-10-06       Impact factor: 3.786

9.  Clinical outcomes for chest pain patients discharged home from emergency departments using high-sensitivity versus conventional cardiac troponin assays.

Authors:  Geoffrey Lau; Maria Koh; Peter A Kavsak; Michael J Schull; David W J Armstrong; Jacob A Udell; Peter C Austin; Xuesong Wang; Dennis T Ko
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 4.749

Review 10.  Clinical endpoint adjudication.

Authors:  Mohammed N Meah; Martin A Denvir; Nicholas L Mills; John Norrie; David E Newby
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2020-06-13       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  1 in total

1.  Disagreement between Cardiac Troponin Tests Yielding a Higher Incidence of Myocardial Injury in the Emergency Setting.

Authors:  Peter A Kavsak; Shawn E Mondoux; Janet Martin; Mark K Hewitt; Lorna Clark; Nadia Caruso; Ching-Tong Mark; V Tony Chetty; Craig Ainsworth; Andrew Worster
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Dev Dis       Date:  2021-03-23
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.