Key result
Switching to the Abbott Architect cTnI assay increased the proportion of patients with cTnI above the 99th percentile to 31.4%, compared to 19.2% with the Dimension assay.
Why the study?
Does switching between contemporary sensitive cardiac troponin assays impact inpatient management and outcomes in individuals undergoing cTnI testing?
Cohort (n=45,498)
No
Does switching between contemporary sensitive cardiac troponin assays impact inpatient management and outcomes in individuals undergoing cTnI testing?
Switching to a more sensitive cardiac troponin assay with a lower 99th percentile cutoff significantly increases the proportion of positive results, leading to changes in patient management and observed outcomes.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Assay switch may increase troponin positivity and prompt more evaluations; leaves open effects on management and outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Myocardial infarction is characterized by an increase of cardiac troponin I (cTnI) above the 99th percentile of a reference population. Our hospital switched from 1 contemporary cTnI assay to another and observed a doubling of cTnI results above the assays' respective 99th percentile cutoffs. We investigated the potential impact on inpatient management and outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 45 498 individuals with ≥1 cTnI result between January 2013 and June 2014. The Dimension cTnI assay was used in 2013; the Abbott Architect cTnI assay was used in 2014. RESULTS: Before switching cTnI assays, 19.2% (4742/30 872) of patients had at least 1 of the first 3 cTnIs above the 99th percentile (0.07 μg/L). After switching to the Architect cTnI assay, 31.4% (4034/14 626) of patients had at least 1 cTnI above the 99th percentile (0.03 μg/L). This increase was due to the difference in the assays' 99th percentile cutoffs. Having an increased cTnI reported on the Architect assay that would not have been reported as such on the Dimension assay (0.03-0.06 μg/L) correlated with increased inpatient mortality, length of stay, non-ST elevation myocardial infarction diagnosis, therapeutic heparin use, and percutaneous coronary intervention, relative to individuals with cTnI <0.03 μg/L. CONCLUSIONS: The changes observed in patient outcomes and management were likely due to the increased sensitivity and lower 99th percentile cutoff of the Architect assay. It is important to recognize the potential impact that differences in sensitivity and assay configuration may have on patient management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wilen et al. (2015) conducted a cohort in Myocardial infarction (n=45,498). Abbott Architect cTnI assay vs. Dimension cTnI assay was evaluated on At least 1 cTnI above the 99th percentile. Switching to the Abbott Architect cTnI assay increased the proportion of patients with cTnI above the 99th percentile to 31.4%, compared to 19.2% with the Dimension assay.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: