Why the study?
Troponin testing is incorporated in ACS diagnostic and risk pathways, but its use, outcomes, and diagnostic accuracy in routine primary care remain understudied.
What is the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of high-sensitivity troponin testing in routine primary care?
What is the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of high-sensitivity troponin testing in routine primary care?
High-sensitivity troponin testing in primary care has a very high negative predictive value (99.7%) for ruling out death or ACS at 30 days, supporting its potential role in a multi-marker rule-out strategy for low-risk patients.
Should not yet change primary care practice; leaves open prospective validation of troponin for ACS rule-out.
OBJECTIVES: Troponin testing is indicated in the diagnostic work-up of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and incorporated in risk stratification pathways. This study aims to gain insights on the use, outcomes, and diagnostic accuracy of troponin testing in routine primary care; a setting that is understudied. METHODS: Routine data were used from the academic primary care network in the Amsterdam metropolitan area (968,433 patient records). The study population included adult patients who underwent high-sensitivity troponin I or T (hs-TnI/T) testing between 2011 and 2021. The primary outcome was the reported diagnosis and the secondary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy measured by death or ACS at 30 days. RESULTS: 3,184 patients underwent hs-troponin testing, either with hsTNT (n=2,333) or hsTNI (n=851). Median patients' age was 55 (44-65) years, and 62.3 % were female. Predominant symptoms were chest pain and dyspnea (56.7 %). Additional diagnostic laboratory tests were commonly performed (CRP: 47.7 %, natriuretic peptides: 25.6 %, d-dimer: 21.5 %). Most common diagnoses were musculoskeletal symptoms (21.6 %) and coronary heart disease (7.1 %; 1.1 % ACS). Troponin testing showed sensitivity and specificity of 77.8 % (60.9-89.9) and 94.3 % (93.5-95.1), respectively. Negative and positive predictive values were 99.7 (99.5-99.9) and 13.5 (11.1-16.4), and positive and negative likelihood ratios were 13.7 (10.9-17.1) and 0.24 (0.13-0.43). CONCLUSIONS: GPs occasionally use troponin testing in very low-risk patients, often as part of a multi-marker rule-out strategy. The diagnostic characteristics of troponin tests, while promising, warrant prospective validation and implementation to facilitate appropriate use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Harskamp et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: