Key result
Combining myocardial necrosis markers with indicators of platelet activation is hypothesized to be more powerful for myocardial infarction risk stratification than separate marker determination.
Why the study?
Does combining myocardial necrosis markers with indicators of platelet activation improve myocardial infarction risk stratification in patients presenting to emergency departments with chest pain compared to separate marker determination?
Does combining myocardial necrosis markers with indicators of platelet activation improve myocardial infarction risk stratification in patients presenting to emergency departments with chest pain compared to separate marker determination?
Combining necrosis and platelet markers may improve the rapid identification and risk stratification of patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain.
May improve ED chest pain risk stratification; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
Each year, at least 5 million patients in the United States present to hospital emergency departments with the complaint of chest pain, and more than 10% of them will be diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction. One of the foremost tasks of the emergency department physician is to avoid unnecessary admissions and concomitantly to minimize the number of patients discharged home inappropriately. Currently available diagnostic tools, including the electrocardiogram and myocardial markers, have several shortcomings, including low specificity, and delayed sensitivity for the timely detection of myocardial necrosis. Therefore, the search for better methods of rapidly identifying patients with unstable coronary syndromes is one of the utmost priorities of modern emergency medicine. Available biochemical diagnostic tools are discussed in this review, focusing on the potential benefits of combining myocardial necrosis markers with indicators of platelet activation. It is hypothesized that such a combined approach may be more powerful in myocardial infarction risk stratification than separate marker determination.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nair et al. (2000) conducted a review in Acute myocardial infarction. Combining myocardial necrosis markers with indicators of platelet activation vs. Separate marker determination was evaluated on Myocardial infarction risk stratification. Combining myocardial necrosis markers with indicators of platelet activation is hypothesized to be more powerful for myocardial infarction risk stratification than separate marker determination.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: