PLoS ONE (Jan 2014)

Clinical criteria replenish high-sensitive troponin and inflammatory markers in the stratification of patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome.

  • Barbara Elisabeth Stähli,
  • Keiko Yonekawa,
  • Lukas Andreas Altwegg,
  • Christophe Wyss,
  • Danielle Hof,
  • Philipp Fischbacher,
  • Andreas Brauchlin,
  • Georg Schulthess,
  • Pierre-Alexandre Krayenbühl,
  • Arnold von Eckardstein,
  • Martin Hersberger,
  • Michel Neidhart,
  • Steffen Gay,
  • Igor Novopashenny,
  • Regine Wolters,
  • Michelle Frank,
  • Manfred Bernd Wischnewsky,
  • Thomas Felix Lüscher,
  • Willibald Maier

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098626
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 9, no. 6
p. e98626

Abstract

Read online

OBJECTIVES: In patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS), rapid triage is essential. The aim of this study was to establish a tool for risk prediction of 30-day cardiac events (CE) on admission. 30-day cardiac events (CE) were defined as early coronary revascularization, subsequent myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular death within 30 days. METHODS AND RESULTS: This single-centre, prospective cohort study included 377 consecutive patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected ACS and for whom troponin T measurements were requested on clinical grounds. Fifteen biomarkers were analyzed in the admission sample, and clinical parameters were assessed by the TIMI risk score for unstable angina/Non-ST myocardial infarction and the GRACE risk score. Sixty-nine (18%) patients presented with and 308 (82%) without ST-elevations, respectively. Coronary angiography was performed in 165 (44%) patients with subsequent percutaneous coronary intervention--accounting for the majority of CE--in 123 (33%) patients, respectively. Eleven out of 15 biomarkers were elevated in patients with CE compared to those without. High-sensitive troponin T (hs-cTnT) was the best univariate biomarker to predict CE in Non-ST-elevation patients (AUC 0.80), but did not yield incremental information above clinical TIMI risk score (AUC 0.80 vs 0.82, p = 0.69). Equivalence testing of AUCs of risk models and non-inferiority testing demonstrated that the clinical TIMI risk score alone was non-inferior to its combination with hs-cTnT in predicting CE. CONCLUSIONS: In patients presenting without ST-elevations, identification of those prone to CE is best based on clinical assessment based on TIMI risk score criteria and hs-cTnT.