Why the study?
Does albumin adjusted IMA index improve diagnostic accuracy for acute myocardial infarction compared to unadjusted IMA?
Does albumin adjusted IMA index improve diagnostic accuracy for acute myocardial infarction compared to unadjusted IMA?
Albumin adjusted IMA index has better clinical utility than unadjusted IMA for diagnosing acute myocardial infarction because it nullifies the interference of albumin concentration.
Supports albumin-adjusted IMA for AMI diagnosis; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation.
Objectives: To find out if there is any relationship between serum level of albumin and IMA estimated by albumin cobalt binding assay. The effectiveness of albumin adjusted IMA index in the diagnosis of Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI) was also studied. Material and methods: We analyzed serum levels of IMA and albumin adjusted IMA index in 120 patients each with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and apparently healthy subjects belonging to the control group. Further, both control and AMI groups were separately divided based on serum albumin concentration in to four groups of 4.51g/dl (n =30 each). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of IMA was calculated and compared with that of Albumin adjusted IMA index. Results: there was a significant negative correlation (r = -0.473 and p value = <0.001) seen between the IMA level and serum albumin. Serum levels of IMA were significantly higher in AMI patients than in healthy controls (p value = <0.001), where as albumin adjusted IMA index values did not show any significant difference between the groups. Comparison of AMI and control groups showed higher values of Albumin adjusted IMA index than IMA in all the parameters used for comparison except sensitivity. Conclusion: Except sensitivity and NPV at very low concentration of albumin, albumin adjusted IMA has better clinical utility as it nullifies the interference of albumin concentration on IMA at all levels of serum albumin concentration.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
K et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: