These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of fourteen rule-out strategies for acute myocardial infarction.
    Author: Wildi K, Boeddinghaus J, Nestelberger T, Twerenbold R, Badertscher P, Wussler D, Giménez MR, Puelacher C, du Fay de Lavallaz J, Dietsche S, Walter J, Kozhuharov N, Morawiec B, Miró Ò, Javier Martin-Sanchez F, Subramaniam S, Geigy N, Keller DI, Reichlin T, Mueller C, APACE investigators.
    Journal: Int J Cardiol; 2019 May 15; 283():41-47. PubMed ID: 30545622.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The clinical availability of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) has enabled the development of several innovative strategies for the rapid rule-out of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Due to the lack of direct comparisons, selection of the best strategy for clinical practice is challenging. METHODS: In a prospective international multicenter diagnostic study enrolling 3696 patients presenting with suspected AMI to the emergency department, we compared the safety and efficacy of 14 different hs-cTn-based strategies: hs-cTn concentrations below the limit of detection (LoD), dual-marker combining hs-cTn with copeptin, ESC 0 h/1 h-algorithm, 0 h/2 h-algorithm, 2 h-ADP-algorithm, NICE-algorithm, and ESC 0 h/3 h-algorithm, each using either hs-cTnT or hs-cTnI. The final diagnosis of AMI was adjudicated by two independent cardiologists using all available clinical information including cardiac imaging and serial hs-cTn concentrations. RESULTS: AMI was the final diagnosis in 16% of patients. Using hs-cTnT, safety quantified by the negative predictive value (NPV) and sensitivity was very high (99.8-100% and 99.5-100%) and comparable for all strategies, except the dual-marker approach (NPV 98.7%, sensitivity 96.7%). Similarly, using hs-cTnI, safety quantified by the NPV and sensitivity was very high (99.7-100% and 98.9-100%) and comparable for all strategies, except the dual-marker approach (NPV 96.9%, sensitivity 90.4%) and the NICE-algorithm (NPV 99.1%, sensitivity 94.7%). Efficacy, quantified by the percentage of patients eligible for rule-out, differed markedly, and was lowest for LoD-algorithm (15.7-26.8%). CONCLUSION: All rapid rule-out algorithms, except the dual-marker strategy and the NICE-algorithm using hs-cTnI, favorably combine safety and efficacy, and can be considered for routine clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00470587, http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00470587.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]