Key result
Higher total and direct bilirubin levels are linked to troponin positivity in NSTE-ACS.
Why the study?
Data regarding the role of serum bilirubin levels in predicting troponin positivity in NSTE-ACS were scant.
Observational (n=782)
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Serum bilirubin may aid NSTE-ACS identification; leaves open incremental value beyond troponin pending prospective validation.
Data are scant regarding serum bilirubin levels in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). In this study, we evaluated the role of serum bilirubin levels in NSTE-ACS. We enrolled 782 patients who presented to the emergency department with acute chest pain. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the troponin positivity. Patients with NSTE-ACS who had troponin positivity were included in group 1 (n = 382), and group 2 consisted of the control patients (n = 400). Direct bilirubin (DB) levels (group 1: 0.31 ± 0.37 mg/dL, group 2: 0.20 ± 0.25 mg/dL, P < .001) and total bilirubin (TB) levels (group 1: 0.78 ± 0.56 mg/dL, group 2: 0.62 ± 0.45 mg/dL, P < .001) were significantly higher in group 1. There was a significant and moderate correlation between serum bilirubin levels and admission troponin values ( r = .34, P < .001 for TB and r = .42, P < .001 for DB). These results show that serum bilirubin levels were associated with troponin positivity in patients with NSTE-ACS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Öztürk et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) (n=782). Serum bilirubin levels (total and direct bilirubin) vs. Control patients without troponin positivity was evaluated on Troponin positivity in NSTE-ACS (and correlation with admission troponin values) (r = 0.34 for TB; r = 0.42 for DB, p=<0.001). Serum total and direct bilirubin levels were significantly higher in troponin-positive NSTE-ACS patients vs controls (TB: 0.78 vs 0.62 mg/dL; DB: 0.31 vs 0.20 mg/dL; both P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: