Reviews
18 April 2017

Rapid Rule-out of Acute Myocardial Infarction With a Single High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T Measurement Below the Limit of Detection: A Collaborative Meta-analysis

Publication: Annals of Internal Medicine
Volume 166, Number 10

Abstract

This article has been corrected. The original version (PDF) is appended to this article as a Supplement.

Background:

High-sensitivity assays for cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) are sometimes used to rapidly rule out acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Purpose:

To estimate the ability of a single hs-cTnT concentration below the limit of detection (<0.005 µg/L) and a nonischemic electrocardiogram (ECG) to rule out AMI in adults presenting to the emergency department (ED) with chest pain.

Data Sources:

EMBASE and MEDLINE without language restrictions (1 January 2008 to 14 December 2016).

Study Selection:

Cohort studies involving adults presenting to the ED with possible acute coronary syndrome in whom an ECG and hs-cTnT measurements were obtained and AMI outcomes adjudicated during initial hospitalization.

Data Extraction:

Investigators of studies provided data on the number of low-risk patients (no new ischemia on ECG and hs-cTnT measurements <0.005 µg/L) and the number who had AMI during hospitalization (primary outcome) or a major adverse cardiac event (MACE) or death within 30 days (secondary outcomes), by risk classification (low or not low risk). Two independent epidemiologists rated risk of bias of studies.

Data Synthesis:

Of 9241 patients in 11 cohort studies, 2825 (30.6%) were classified as low risk. Fourteen (0.5%) low-risk patients had AMI. Sensitivity of the risk classification for AMI ranged from 87.5% to 100% in individual studies. Pooled estimated sensitivity was 98.7% (95% CI, 96.6% to 99.5%). Sensitivity for 30-day MACEs ranged from 87.9% to 100%; pooled sensitivity was 98.0% (CI, 94.7% to 99.3%). No low-risk patients died.

Limitation:

Few studies, variation in timing and methods of reference standard troponin tests, and heterogeneity of risk and prevalence of AMI across studies.

Conclusion:

A single hs-cTnT concentration below the limit of detection in combination with a nonischemic ECG may successfully rule out AMI in patients presenting to EDs with possible emergency acute coronary syndrome.

Primary Funding Source:

Emergency Care Foundation.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Supplemental Material

Supplement 1. Study Protocol

Supplement 2. Supplementary Material

Supplement. Original Version (PDF)

References

1.
Six AJBackus BEKelder JC. Chest pain in the emergency room: value of the HEART score. Neth Heart J. 2008;16:191-6. [PMID: 18665203]
2.
Hess EPBrison RJPerry JJCalder LAThiruganasambandamoorthy VAgarwal Det al. Development of a clinical prediction rule for 30-day cardiac events in emergency department patients with chest pain and possible acute coronary syndrome. Ann Emerg Med. 2012;59:115-25. [PMID: 21885156]  doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.07.026
3.
Than MFlaws DSanders SDoust JGlasziou PKline Jet al. Development and validation of the Emergency Department Assessment of Chest Pain Score and 2 h accelerated diagnostic protocol. Emerg Med Australas. 2014;26:34-44. [PMID: 24428678]  doi: 10.1111/1742-6723.12164
4.
Body RCarley SMcDowell GJaffe ASFrance MCruickshank Ket al. Rapid exclusion of acute myocardial infarction in patients with undetectable troponin using a high-sensitivity assay. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:1332-9. [PMID: 21920261]  doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.026
5.
Rubini Giménez MHoeller RReichlin TZellweger CTwerenbold RReiter Met al. Rapid rule out of acute myocardial infarction using undetectable levels of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin. Int J Cardiol. 2013;168:3896-901. [PMID: 23876467]  doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2013.06.049
6.
Roffi MPatrono CCollet JPMueller CValgimigli MAndreotti Fet alManagement of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation of the European Society of Cardiology. 2015 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: Task Force for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2016;37:267-315. [PMID: 26320110]  doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv320
7.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Myocardial infarction (acute): early rule out using high-sensitivity troponin tests (Elecsys Troponin T high-sensitive, ARCHITECT STAT High Sensitive Troponin-I and AccuTnI+3 assays). Diagnostic guidance DG15. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2014. Accessed at http://nice.org.uk/guidance/dg15 on 15 February 2017.
8.
Bandstein NLjung RJohansson MHolzmann MJ. Undetectable high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T level in the emergency department and risk of myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:2569-78. [PMID: 24694529]  doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.03.017
9.
Cullen LThan MPeacock WF. Undetectable hs-cTnT in the emergency department and risk of myocardial infarction [Letter]. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:632-3. [PMID: 25104539]  doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.04.061
10.
Zhelev ZHyde CYoungman ERogers MFleming SSlade Tet al. Diagnostic accuracy of single baseline measurement of Elecsys Troponin T high-sensitive assay for diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction in emergency department: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2015;350:h15. [PMID: 25646632]  doi: 10.1136/bmj.h15
11.
Sethi ABajaj AMalhotra GArora RRKhosla S. Diagnostic accuracy of sensitive or high-sensitive troponin on presentation for myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2014;10:435-50. [PMID: 25092986]  doi: 10.2147/VHRM.S63416
12.
Liberati AAltman DGTetzlaff JMulrow CGøtzsche PCIoannidis JPet al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000100. [PMID: 19621070]  doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100
13.
Thygesen KAlpert JSWhite HDJaffe ASApple FSGalvani Met alJoint ESC/ACCF/AHA/WHF Task Force for the Redefinition of Myocardial Infarction. Universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2007;116:2634-53. [PMID: 17951284]
14.
Cullen LThan MBrown AFRichards MParsonage WFlaws Det al. Comprehensive standardized data definitions for acute coronary syndrome research in emergency departments in Australasia. Emerg Med Australas. 2010;22:35-55. [PMID: 20136639]  doi: 10.1111/j.1742-6723.2010.01256.x
15.
Reitsma JBGlas ASRutjes AWScholten RJBossuyt PMZwinderman AH. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:982-90. [PMID: 16168343]
16.
Higgins JPThompson SGSpiegelhalter DJ. A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2009;172:137-59. [PMID: 19381330]
17.
The R Foundation. The R Project for Statistical Computing. 2017. Accessed at www.R-project.org on 27 February 2017.
18.
Whiting PFRutjes AWWestwood MEMallett SDeeks JJReitsma JBet alQUADAS-2 Group. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:529-36. [PMID: 22007046].  doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009
19.
Reichlin THochholzer WBassetti SSteuer SStelzig CHartwiger Set al. Early diagnosis of myocardial infarction with sensitive cardiac troponin assays. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:858-67. [PMID: 19710484]  doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0900428
20.
Than MCullen LAldous SParsonage WAReid CMGreenslade Jet al. 2-Hour accelerated diagnostic protocol to assess patients with chest pain symptoms using contemporary troponins as the only biomarker: the ADAPT trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:2091-8. [PMID: 22578923]  doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.02.035
21.
Goodacre SWBradburn MCross ECollinson PGray AHall ASRATPAC Research Team. The Randomised Assessment of Treatment Using Panel Assay of Cardiac Markers (RATPAC) trial: a randomised controlled trial of point-of-care cardiac markers in the emergency department. Heart. 2011;97:190-6. [PMID: 20884788]  doi: 10.1136/hrt.2010.203166
22.
Munro ARJerram TMorton THamilton S. Use of an accelerated diagnostic pathway allows rapid and safe discharge of 70% of chest pain patients from the emergency department. N Z Med J. 2015;128:62-71. [PMID: 25662380]
23.
Sebbane MLefebvre SKuster NJreige RJacques EBadiou Set al. Early rule out of acute myocardial infarction in ED patients: value of combined high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T and ultrasensitive copeptin assays at admission. Am J Emerg Med. 2013;31:1302-8. [PMID: 23816196]  doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2013.04.033
24.
Biener MMueller MVafaie MKatus HAGiannitsis E. Impact of leading presenting symptoms on the diagnostic performance of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T and on outcomes in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome. Clin Chem. 2015;61:744-51. [PMID: 25737534]  doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2014.235317
25.
Freund YChenevier-Gobeaux CBonnet PClaessens YEAllo JCDoumenc Bet al. High-sensitivity versus conventional troponin in the emergency department for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction. Crit Care. 2011;15:R147. [PMID: 21663627]  doi: 10.1186/cc10270
26.
Ter Avest EVisser AReitsma BBreedveld RWolthuis A. Point-of-care troponin T is inferior to high-sensitivity troponin T for ruling out acute myocardial infarction in the emergency department. Eur J Emerg Med. 2016;23:95-101. [PMID: 25536392]  doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000225
27.
Mokhtari ALindahl BSmith JGHolzmann MJKhoshnood AEkelund U. Diagnostic accuracy of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T at presentation combined with history and ECG for ruling out major adverse cardiac events. Ann Emerg Med. 2016;68:649-58. [PMID: 27471140]  doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2016.06.008
28.
Collinson PGoodacre SGaze DGray ARATPAC Research Team. Very early diagnosis of chest pain by point-of-care testing: comparison of the diagnostic efficiency of a panel of cardiac biomarkers compared with troponin measurement alone in the RATPAC trial. Heart. 2012;98:312-8. [PMID: 22076016]  doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300723
29.
Rubini Gimenez MTwerenbold RReichlin TWildi KHaaf PSchaefer Met al. Direct comparison of high-sensitivity-cardiac troponin I vs. T for the early diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2303-11. [PMID: 24842285]  doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu188
30.
Than MHerbert MFlaws DCullen LHess EHollander JEet al. What is an acceptable risk of major adverse cardiac event in chest pain patients soon after discharge from the emergency department?: a clinical survey [Letter]. Int J Cardiol. 2013;166:752-4. [PMID: 23084108]  doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.09.171
31.
Aldous SJFlorkowski CMCrozier IGElliott JGeorge PLainchbury JGet al. Comparison of high sensitivity and contemporary troponin assays for the early detection of acute myocardial infarction in the emergency department. Ann Clin Biochem. 2011;48:241-8. [PMID: 21441390]  doi: 10.1258/acb.2010.010219
32.
Aldous SJRichards MCullen LTroughton RThan M. Diagnostic and prognostic utility of early measurement with high-sensitivity troponin T assay in patients presenting with chest pain. CMAJ. 2012;184:E260-8. [PMID: 22291171]  doi: 10.1503/cmaj.110773
33.
Hammerer-Lercher APloner TNeururer SSchratzberger PGriesmacher APachinger Oet al. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin T compared with standard troponin T testing on emergency department admission: how much does it add in everyday clinical practice? J Am Heart Assoc. 2013;2:e000204. [PMID: 23735897]  doi: 10.1161/JAHA.113.000204
34.
Christ MPopp SPohlmann HPoravas MUmarov DBach Ret al. Implementation of high sensitivity cardiac troponin T measurement in the emergency department. Am J Med. 2010;123:1134-42. [PMID: 20932502]  doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2010.07.015
35.
Carlton EWCullen LThan MGamble JKhattab AGreaves K. A novel diagnostic protocol to identify patients suitable for discharge after a single high-sensitivity troponin. Heart. 2015;101:1041-6. [PMID: 25691511]  doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2014-307288
36.
Sanchis JGarcía-Blas SMainar LMollar AAbellán LVentura Set al. High-sensitivity versus conventional troponin for management and prognosis assessment of patients with acute chest pain. Heart. 2014;100:1591-6. [PMID: 24947318]
37.
Thelin JMelander OÖhlin B. Early rule-out of acute coronary syndrome using undetectable levels of high sensitivity troponin T. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2015;4:403-9. [PMID: 25281765]  doi: 10.1177/2048872614554107
38.
Pickering JWGreenslade JHCullen LFlaws DParsonage WAldous Set al. Assessment of the European Society of Cardiology 0-hour/1-hour algorithm to rule-out and rule-in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2016;134:1532-41. [PMID: 27754881]
39.
Apple FSJaffe AS. Clinical implications of a recent adjustment to the high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T assay: user beware [Letter]. Clin Chem. 2012;58:1599-600. [PMID: 22968106]  doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2012.194985
40.
Wildi KTwerenbold RJaeger CRubini Giménez MReichlin TStoll Met al. Clinical impact of the 2010–2012 low-end shift of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2016;5:399-408. [PMID: 27055466]
41.
Hoeller RRubini Giménez MReichlin TTwerenbold RZellweger CMoehring Bet al. Normal presenting levels of high-sensitivity troponin and myocardial infarction. Heart. 2013;99:1567-72. [PMID: 23604180]  doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2013-303643
42.
Parsonage WATate JRGreenslade JHHammett CJUngerer JPPretorius CJet al. Effect of recalibration of the hs-TnT assay on diagnostic performance [Letter]. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2014;52:e25-7. [PMID: 23924523]  doi: 10.1515/cclm-2013-0490
43.
Reichlin TSchindler CDrexler BTwerenbold RReiter MZellweger Cet al. One-hour rule-out and rule-in of acute myocardial infarction using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172:1211-8. [PMID: 22892889]  doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.3698
44.
Parsonage WAMueller CGreenslade JHWildi KPickering JThan Met al. Validation of NICE diagnostic guidance for rule out of myocardial infarction using high-sensitivity troponin tests. Heart. 2016;102:1279-86. [PMID: 27288278]  doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2016-309270
45.
Mahler SARiley RFHiestand BCRussell GBHoekstra JWLefebvre CWet al. The HEART Pathway randomized trial: identifying emergency department patients with acute chest pain for early discharge. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2015;8:195-203. [PMID: 25737484]  doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.114.001384
46.
Than MAldous SLord SJGoodacre SFrampton CMTroughton Ret al. A 2-hour diagnostic protocol for possible cardiac chest pain in the emergency department: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:51-8. [PMID: 24100783]  doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.11362
47.
Than MPPickering JWAldous SJCullen LFrampton CMPeacock WFet al. Effectiveness of EDACS versus ADAPT accelerated diagnostic pathways for chest pain: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial embedded within practice. Ann Emerg Med. 2016;68:93-102. [PMID: 26947800]  doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2016.01.001
48.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Chest Pain of Recent Onset: Assessment and Diagnosis of Recent Onset Chest Pain or Discomfort of Suspected Cardiac Origin (Update). Nice Guideline CG95. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2016. Accessed at www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg95/evidence/full-guideline-245282221 on 21 February 2017.

Comments

0 Comments
Sign In to Submit A Comment
Zhen Zhao, PhD, Matthew Greenblatt, MD, PhD, Lance Truong, MS 15 October 2019
Concerns
We are writing to discuss concerns regarding a recent publication “Rapid Rule-out of Acute Myocardial Infarction with a Single High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T Measurement Below the Limit of Detection, A Collaborative Meta-analysis” (Ann Intern Med. 2017 May 16;166(10):715-724). We have found important discrepancies between the data found in the manuscript and the values presented in the meta-analysis itself. This study claimed that it performed a meta-analysis of 11 cohorts using hs-cTnT below the LoD (5ng/L) and a nonischemic ECG (Figures 2 and 3). However, three of the studies did not use hs-cTnT, six studies used different cutoff values, and two studies reported different sensitivities. In short, none of the cited studies used the exact same criteria as described by the meta-analysis. We believe that these discrepancies in part reflect that the investigators are not aware of several lab medicine related issues pertaining to troponin assays. We believe that these findings have a major impact on the validity of the conclusions of this manuscript.
John W Pickering, PhD and Martin Than, MD on behalf of the study authors 18 October 2019
In response:
We thank Dr Zhao and colleagues for taking an interest in our study and going to the trouble of looking up the primary references of the eleven studies. We agree that there are numerous lab medicine related issues pertaining to troponin assays that are often under-appreciated and believe that as members and contributors to the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) Task Force on Clinical Applications of Cardiac Biomarkers, that we have a good understanding of this issues. We believe that the queries raised are well intentioned and we are pleased to be able to respond and to highlight a number of aspects in the way our study was conducted that may have been misinterpreted by Dr Zhao and colleagues. Firstly, they are correct in that three of the studies did not use hs-cTnT to adjudicate final outcomes. These studies are identified in Supplementary Table 4 of the abstract. It is very common in the literature to see with development and validation of diagnostic algorithms that the troponin assay tested is different from the assay used to adjudicate outcomes. This, though, has no bearing on the analysis performed. Secondly, it is not accurate to suggest that the meta-analysis performed did not use the exact same criteria as described in the meta-analysis. The analysis performed is entirely based on the source data provided by the authors of each of the 11 studies of cTnT concentrations measured with the hs-cTnT assay. We believe that for a meta-analysis source data is preferable to data extracted from papers. The search criteria used (see the Study Selection criteria) merely identified studies with hs-cTnT measurement. We specifically excluded studies if, when the study investigators were contacted, they were unable or unwilling to provide source data. The data provided by the investigators of the 11 studies was in the form of 2x2 tables of hs-cTnT performance at the thresholds of 5 ng/L (LoD) and 3 ng/L (LoB) (See Supplementary Tables 6 and 7). In short, data from all of the cited studies used the exact same criteria. We believe the conclusions of the manuscript are valid. We apologize if wording in the paper has caused any confusion.