Key result
Fibrin clots, heterophilic antibodies, and skeletal cross-reactions frequently cause false-positive cardiac troponin elevations.
Why the study?
False-positive increases in cardiac troponins are frequently encountered in clinical practice and can lead to misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment.
Understanding the causes of false-positive cardiac troponin elevations is crucial to prevent misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment in clinical practice.
May reduce misdiagnosis from troponin false positives; leaves open assay standardization and prospective validation.
Cardiac troponins (cTns) are the most valuable and specific markers of cardiovascular diseases, including acute myocardial infarction. These biomarkers can also be used to assess the degree of myocardial damage in non-cardiac diseases that can negatively affect the cells of cardiac muscle tissue. However, in everyday clinical practice, doctors often encounter with false-positive cases of increased cTns. False-positive cases of increased cTns can contribute to incorrect diagnosis and subsequent inadequate treatment, which causes significant harm to the patient. This review discusses some common causes of a false-positive increase in the level of cTns in the blood serum. Such causes are fibrin clots, heterophilic antibodies, alkaline phosphatase, rheumatoid factor, and cross-reactions of diagnostic (anti-cTn) antibodies with skeletal troponins. Detailed attention is focused on the mechanisms of false-positive increase, and ways to identify and combat these false-positive causes of increased cTns. This has an important practical significance in modern clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aleksey M. Chaulin (2022) conducted a review in False-positive cardiac troponin elevation. False-positive elevations in serum cardiac troponins are frequently caused by fibrin clots, heterophilic antibodies, alkaline phosphatase, rheumatoid factor, and cross-reactions with skeletal troponins.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: