Why the study?
ACS requires urgent intervention, motivating the evaluation of platelet indices and mean platelet volume as additional diagnostic markers to differentiate ACS from non-ACS.
Do platelet indices (such as MPV) improve the diagnostic differentiation of acute coronary syndrome from non-ACS in patients presenting with acute chest pain?
Do platelet indices (such as MPV) improve the diagnostic differentiation of acute coronary syndrome from non-ACS in patients presenting with acute chest pain?
Platelet indices, particularly mean platelet volume (MPV), are significantly elevated in acute coronary syndrome compared to non-ACS chest pain, suggesting potential utility as an early, accessible diagnostic tool.
MPV shows moderate diagnostic performance for ACS in chest pain; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Background: Approximately 10-15% of acute chest pain is secondary to ACS which occur due to sudden blockage in a coronary artery the blood supply to the heart muscles get reduced signicantly or cuts off completely. ACS is a life-threatening condition that requires urgent intervention where saving time in diagnosis means saving cardiac muscles. Aims and Objectives: To study platelet indices in acute coronary syndrome and non acute coronary syndrome and to explore the role of mean platelet volume as an additional marker in diagnostic workup of acute coronary syndrome. Material and Methods: This cross-sectional, comparative & observational study was conducted in Department of Medicine, MGM Medical College and Hospital, Navi Mumbai from December 2018 – October 2020. A total of 102 patients presented with chest pain in the Emergency Department and diagnosed as having either ACS or NON-ACS were included. Results: ACS predominantly affects the male population i.e. 73.53% in the present study. STEMI was present in 78.43% than NSTEMI 19.61%. Diabetes was present in 20.59% and hypertension in 27.45% patients. Mean Hb was higher in the ACS group than in the NON-ACS group (p value: 0.001). Similarly, mean TLC, MPV, PDW, P-LCR and Mean Trop T was higher in the ACS group than in the NON-ACS group (p value: 0.001). Mean EF was lower in the ACS group than in the NON-ACS group (p <0.0001). The area under the ROC curve for classifying ACS and Non-ACS using Platelets as marker was 57.3% (p value: 0.206). A threshold value of Platelets ≥ 2.59 for ACS patients yields a sensitivity of 54.90%, Specicity of 50.98%, PPV of 52.83%, NPV of 53.06% and Accuracy of 52.94%. The area under the ROC curve for classifying ACS and Non-ACS using MPV as marker was 74.7% (P value: < 0.001). A threshold value of MPV ≥ 10.1 for ACS patients yields a sensitivity of 76.47%, Specicity of 64.71%, PPV of 68.42%, NPV of 73.33% and Accuracy of 70.59%. For MPV ≥ 10.1, the odds in favour of ACS was 5.958 i.e., the chances of ACS is 5.95 times that of Non-ACS. Conclusion: It can be concluded from the present study that the platelet indices, viz, MPV, PDW and P-LCR, are higher in ACS than in NON-ACS. Thus, they may be used to differentiate the ACS cases. More research needs to be done in this regard, to develop the platelet indices as an early diagnostic tool for the ACS cases, especially in a limited resource country, like India.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maheshwari et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: