Key result
A bedside rapid hs-cTnI assay provided comparable diagnostic value to routine hs-cTnT for acute myocardial infarction, with a higher positive predictive value (50.0% vs 25.8%) and faster results.
Why the study?
Although troponin measurement is recommended for AMI diagnosis, hs-cTnT can be elevated due to non-cardiac conditions such as skeletal muscle injury, CKD, or pulmonary embolism.
Does a bedside rapid hs-cTnI assay provide comparable diagnostic accuracy and faster results than routine laboratory hs-cTnT in patients with acute chest pain?
Population
129 patients with acute chest pain
Comparison
Bedside rapid hs-cTnI assay vs routine laboratory hs-cTnT
Design
Prospective monocentric study
Authors
Loading...
Bedside hs-cTnI yields comparable AMI rule-out to lab hs-cTnT with faster results; leaves open whether it improves outcomes in broader emergency settings.
Observational (n=129)
No
Does a bedside rapid hs-cTnI assay provide comparable diagnostic accuracy and faster results than routine laboratory hs-cTnT in patients with acute chest pain?
Relative Risk: 6.59
Absolute Event Rate: 50% vs 25.8%
A bedside rapid hs-cTnI assay provides comparable diagnostic accuracy to routine laboratory hs-cTnT for AMI, with a higher positive predictive value and significantly faster time to results.
Han et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Acute chest pain (n=129). Bedside rapid hs-cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) assay vs. Routine laboratory hs-cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) assay was evaluated on Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) diagnosis (RR 6.59). A bedside rapid hs-cTnI assay provided comparable diagnostic value to routine hs-cTnT for acute myocardial infarction, with a higher positive predictive value (50.0% vs 25.8%) and faster results.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: