Key result
Cancer patients presenting with acute chest pain had a lower rate of MI rule-out using the ESC 0/1-hour protocol compared to patients without cancer (35.7% vs 62.7%), though sensitivity remained >99%.
Why the study?
Does the ESC 0/1-hour MI rule-out protocol maintain high sensitivity and efficiency for acute MI in patients with cancer compared to those without?
Does the ESC 0/1-hour MI rule-out protocol maintain high sensitivity and efficiency for acute MI in patients with cancer compared to those without?
While the ESC 0/1-hour hs-cTn protocol safely rules out MI in patients with cancer with high sensitivity, it is substantially less efficient, resulting in more cancer patients requiring prolonged observation.
[Figure: see text]
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fanaroff et al. (2023) conducted an editorial in Acute chest pain (suspected myocardial infarction) (n=8,267). Cancer vs. No cancer was evaluated on Proportion of patients ruled out for MI (efficiency). Cancer patients presenting with acute chest pain had a lower rate of MI rule-out using the ESC 0/1-hour protocol compared to patients without cancer (35.7% vs 62.7%), though sensitivity remained >99%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: