Why the study?
Does the Stratus CS point-of-care test system improve the detection of acute myocardial infarction and prognostic assessment compared to the Stratus II assay in patients with acute chest pain?
Does the Stratus CS point-of-care test system improve the detection of acute myocardial infarction and prognostic assessment compared to the Stratus II assay in patients with acute chest pain?
The Stratus CS point-of-care whole-blood analyzer provides rapid, sensitive detection of Troponin I, offering better analytical performance and prognostic information than the Stratus II assay in patients with acute chest pain.
May support earlier AMI detection with Stratus CS in chest pain; leaves open outcome impact versus Stratus II.
BACKGROUND: Troponin I (cTnI) provides important prognostic information in patients with chest pain. We wished to evaluate a rapid, whole-blood analyzer for quantitative point-of-care testing. METHODS: A quantitative point-of-care test system (Stratus CS((R)); Dade-Behring) for cTnI with an incorporated centrifuge was evaluated in 412 patients with chest pain less than 12 h. RESULTS: Results were available within 15 min. CVs were 4.5% at 0.1 microgram/L, 4.2% at 0.25 microgram/L, and 6.5% at 0.82 microgram/L. The detection limit was 0. 01 microgram/L. The 97.5% percentile in a healthy population was 0.08 microgram/L. Based on ROC curve analysis, a threshold of 0.15 microgram/L was calculated for the detection of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). With it, sensitivity for the detection of patients with AMI (n = 62) was 63% at arrival and 98% after 4 h (Stratus II((R)), 48% and 85%, respectively; P <0.01). In 42% of patients with unstable angina (n = 121), cTnI was >/=0.08 microgram/L (Stratus II, 28%; P <0. 01). During 30 days, death or AMI occurred in 25.5% of these cTnI-positive vs 2.9% of cTnI-negative patients (Stratus II, 29.4% vs 5.8%). CONCLUSION: The Stratus CS provided better analytical performance and comparable or better prognostic information than the Stratus II.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Heeschen et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: