Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T04:55:17.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Using single sex-specific high-sensitivity cardiac troponin cut-off values for ruling out myocardial infarction – Are we there yet?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 January 2019

Venkatesh Thiruganasambandamoorthy*
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON School of Epidemiology and Public Health Community Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON
*
Correspondence to: Dr. Venkatesh Thiruganasambandamoorthy, Clinical Epidemiology Unit, The Ottawa Hospital, 1053 Carling Avenue, 6th Floor, Rm F650 Ottawa, Ontario K1Y 4E9; Email: [email protected]

Abstract

Type
Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2019 

INTRODUCTION

Chest pain is the second most common emergency department (ED) presenting complaint.Reference Rui and Kang1 Chest pain constitutes approximately 5% of all ED visits and, in the year 2012, an estimate suggests that there were approximately 600,000 ED visits for chest pain across Canada.Reference Scheuermeyer, Wong and Yu2 Given that chest pain is very common in the ED, improved efficiency in ED management of patients with suspected myocardial infarction (MI) is a key issue in alleviating ED crowding. Yet this improved efficiency should not compromise safety due to a false-negative diagnosis.

In acute care settings, women in comparison with men present with atypical symptoms, have fewer electrocardiogram abnormalities, and have lower cardiac troponin values for any extent of underlying coronary artery disease.Reference Slagman, Searle and Vollert3, Reference Laufer, Mingels and Winkens4 Such differences in troponin values are extremely variable based on the type of assay with large differences with some assay types and negligible with others.Reference Apple and Ler5 Studies have reported that sex-specific cut-off values for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays improve diagnosis and classification performance of MI, particularly in women, leading to professional society guidelines recommending their use.Reference Slagman, Searle and Vollert3, Reference Shah, Griffiths and Lee6, Reference Thygesen, Alpert and Jaffe7 While studies have previously focused on improving ruling-in MI with sex-specific cut-offs, in this issue, McRae and colleagues explore the concept of ruling-out MI with a single Roche Elecsys® high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), using several cut-off levels relative to the limit of detection (< 5 ng/L) and the Food and Drug Administration–approved limit of quantification (< 6 ng/L).Reference McRae, Graham and Abedin8 The 99th percentile reference limit for this assay is 14 ng/L. The study found that sex-specific cut-offs may improve the classification performance and could lead to rule out MI among more patients on ED arrival. The authors were explicit in their discussion that their study was purely exploratory, and future research is needed in this area.

A few points merit discussions on this topic. The 99th percentile reference limit for a normal population is currently being used to define acute MI.Reference Thygesen, Alpert and Jaffe7 However, these 99th percentile values are dependent on the population selected and the definition for heathy that is used in these studies.Reference Apple and Ler5 The study by McRae and colleagues introduces the concept of using sex-specific hs-cTnT cut-off values well below the 99th percentile normal population reference limit, particularly when using a single measurement within 60 minutes of ED arrival for ruling out MI. Hence, moving away from the 99th percentile reference cut-off and using specific values for each assay type that is confirmed in the target population is a step in the right direction for an improved diagnosis of MI. As detailed in the counterpoint argument by Giannitsis, the adoption of ruling in MI with sex-specific cut off values in previous studies has shown very little clinical benefit.Reference Giannitsis9 The use of reclassification should be with caution due to inherent confirmation bias, as the troponin values are incorporated in the adjudication of MI outcome in these studies. Future studies are needed to confirm that sex-specific cut-offs improve the diagnosis of MI and specifically the impact on clinically important hard outcomes such as mortality, and revascularization procedures should be documented. Additionally, such new sex-specific cut-offs identified must be beyond the range of assay variability for adoption into clinical practice, unlike in the published study.

In summary, further large-scale studies that confirm sex-specific cut-offs beyond assay variability and clinical benefit are needed for the incorporation into day-to-day practice. Such sex-specific cut-offs will unfortunately have to be developed for each assay type in the intended target population.

Competing interests

None declared.

References

REFERENCES

1.Rui, PK, Kang, K. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: Emergency department summary tables. Atlanta, GA, USA: National Center for Health Statistics; 2015.Google Scholar
2.Scheuermeyer, FX, Wong, H, Yu, E, et al. Development and validation of a prediction rule for early discharge of low-risk emergency department patients with potential ischemic chest pain. CJEM 2014;16:106-19.10.2310/8000.2013.130938Google Scholar
3.Slagman, A, Searle, J, Vollert, JO, et al. Sex differences of troponin test performance in chest pain patients. Int J Cardiol 2015;187:246-51.10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.03.261Google Scholar
4.Laufer, EM, Mingels, AM, Winkens, MH, et al. The extent of coronary atherosclerosis is associated with increasing circulating levels of high sensitive cardiac troponin T. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2010;30:1269-75.10.1161/ATVBAHA.109.200394Google Scholar
5.Apple, FS, Ler, R, Murakami MM. Determination of 19 cardiac troponin I and T assay 99th percentile values from a common presumably healthy population. Clin Chem 2012;58:1574-81.10.1373/clinchem.2012.192716Google Scholar
6.Shah, AS, Griffiths, M, Lee, KK, et al. High sensitivity cardiac troponin and the underdiagnosis of myocardial infarction in women: prospective cohort study. BMJ 2015;350:g7873.Google Scholar
7.Thygesen, K, Alpert, JS, Jaffe, AS, et al. Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation 2012;126:2020-35.10.1161/CIR.0b013e31826e1058Google Scholar
8.McRae, A, Graham, M, Abedin, T, et al. Sex-specific, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T cut-off concentrations for ruling out acute myocardial infarction with a single measurement. CJEM 2019;21:26-33.10.1017/cem.2018.435Google Scholar
9.Giannitsis, E. Counterpoint: potential concerns regarding the use of sex-specific cutpoints for high-sensitivity troponin assays. Clin Chem 2017;63:264-6.10.1373/clinchem.2016.254680Google Scholar