Key result
C-reactive protein measurement lacked sufficient sensitivity to replace routine endomyocardial biopsy for monitoring acute rejection, occurring in 28% of cases with CRP ≥ 2 vs 17% with CRP ≤ 1 (P=0.1).
Why the study?
Does C-reactive protein (CRP) measurement accurately detect acute rejection in heart transplant patients compared to endomyocardial biopsy?
Population
Heart transplant patients referred for routine endomyocardial biopsy (246 biopsies analyzed)
Comparison
C-reactive protein (CRP) measurement vs Endomyocardial biopsy (EMB)
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
6-month period
Authors
Loading...
Endomyocardial biopsy remains essential for rejection surveillance after heart transplantation; Level 3 data leaves open the search for accurate noninvasive alternatives.
Observational
Does C-reactive protein (CRP) measurement accurately detect acute rejection in heart transplant patients compared to endomyocardial biopsy?
Absolute Event Rate: 28% vs 17%
p-value: p=0.1
CRP measurement lacks sufficient sensitivity to replace routine endomyocardial biopsy for monitoring acute rejection after heart transplantation, though lower CRP levels may predict responsiveness to steroid treatment.
Gelder et al. (1998) conducted an observational in Heart transplantation. C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 2 vs. CRP ≤ 1 was evaluated on Acute rejection (p=0.1). C-reactive protein measurement lacked sufficient sensitivity to replace routine endomyocardial biopsy for monitoring acute rejection, occurring in 28% of cases with CRP ≥ 2 vs 17% with CRP ≤ 1 (P=0.1).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: