Key result
Routine CK testing adds no diagnostic benefit over hsTnT alone for acute myocardial infarction.
Why the study?
Despite the high sensitivity and negative predictive value of hsTnT assays, creatine kinase continues to be routinely tested for ACS diagnosis, and its clinical utility and cost-effectiveness remain unclear.
Does routine creatine kinase testing provide additional clinical utility over high-sensitivity troponin T alone for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction in emergency department patients?
Observational (n=9,951)
No
Does routine creatine kinase testing provide additional clinical utility over high-sensitivity troponin T alone for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction in emergency department patients?
Routine creatine kinase testing in the emergency department provides no additional diagnostic value for acute myocardial infarction in the era of high-sensitivity troponin T assays and represents an unnecessary healthcare cost.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Omitting routine CK testing appears safe but should not yet change practice; leaves open confirmation in prospective trials.
BACKGROUND: Despite the high sensitivity and negative predictive value of contemporary high-sensitivity troponin T assays (hsTnT), creatine kinase (CK) continues to be routinely tested for the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We conducted a study to identify the clinical utility of routine CK measurement, its relevance in clinical decision making in the era of hsTnT, and the potential cost-savings achievable by limiting its use. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all adult patients presenting to a tertiary care center in the year 2017. We identified patients presenting with cardiac complaints who had non-diagnostic hsTnT and positive CK. These patients underwent chart review to determine whether a diagnosis of AMI was made. RESULTS: A total of 36,251 presentations were reviewed. 9951 had cardiac complaints and 8150 had CK measured. 82% of these patients had hsTnT and CK measured; 2012 of these patients had non-diagnostic hsTnT with positive CK. Of these 2012 patients, only 1 was subsequently diagnosed with AMI (0.012%). CK provided no diagnostic benefit over hsTnT alone in > 99.9% of cases. With a cost for CK of $4/test, we estimated that routine CK testing costs at least $32,000 per year in our center, and over $100,000 per year across the region. CONCLUSION: Routine CK testing does not provide a significant benefit to patient care and therefore represents an unnecessary system cost. Routine CK testing for the diagnosis of AMI should be eliminated from emergency departments in the era of hsTnT assays.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wiens et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Acute coronary syndrome (n=9,951). Routine creatine kinase (CK) testing vs. High-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT) alone was evaluated on Diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in patients with non-diagnostic hsTnT and positive CK.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: