Background: High-sensitivity troponin assays promise earlier discrimination of myocardial infarction. Yet, the benefits and harms of this improved discriminatory performance when incorporated within rapid testing protocols, with respect to subsequent testing and clinical events, has not been evaluated in an in-practice patient-level randomized study. This multicenter study evaluated the noninferiority of a 0/1-hour high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) protocol in comparison with a 0/3-hour masked hs-cTnT protocol in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome presenting to the emergency department (ED). Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to either a 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol (reported to the limit of detection [<5 ng/L]) or masked hs-cTnT reported to ≤29 ng/L evaluated at 0/3-hours (standard arm). The 30-day primary end point was all-cause death and myocardial infarction. Noninferiority was defined as an absolute margin of 0.5% determined by Poisson regression. Results: In total, 3378 participants with an emergency presentation were randomly assigned between August 2015 and April 2019. Ninety participants were deemed ineligible or withdrew consent. The remaining participants received care guided either by the 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol (n=1646) or the 0/3-hour standard masked hs-cTnT protocol (n=1642) and were followed for 30 days. Median age was 59 (49–70) years, and 47% were female. Participants in the 0/1-hour arm were more likely to be discharged from the ED (0/1-hour arm: 45.1% versus standard arm: 32.3%, P <0.001) and median ED length of stay was shorter (0/1-hour arm: 4.6 [interquartile range, 3.4–6.4] hours versus standard arm: 5.6 (interquartile range, 4.0–7.1) hours, P <0.001). Those randomly assigned to the 0/1-hour protocol were less likely to undergo functional cardiac testing (0/1-hour arm: 7.5% versus standard arm: 11.0%, P <0.001). The 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol was not inferior to standard care (0/1-hour arm: 18/1646 [1.1%] versus 16/1642 [1.0%]; incidence rate ratio, 1.06 [ 0.53–2.11], noninferiority P value=0.001, superiority P value=0.744), although an increase in myocardial injury was observed. Among patients discharged from ED, the 0/1-hour protocol had a negative predictive value of 99.6% (95% CI, 99.0–99.9%) for 30-day death or myocardial infarction. Conclusions: This in-practice evaluation of a 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol embedded in ED care enabled more rapid discharge of patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome. Improving short-term outcomes among patients with newly recognized troponin T elevation will require an evolution in management strategies for these patients. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.anzctr.org.au . Unique identifier: ACTRN12615001379505.
An accurate knowledge of evidence-based risk factors is important in predicting and preventing postoperative DVT, and can be incorporated into a decision support system for appropriate thromboprophylaxis use.
Background: High-sensitivity troponin assays are increasingly being adopted to expedite evaluation of patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes. Few direct comparisons have examined whether the enhanced performance of these assays at low concentrations leads to changes in care that improves longer-term outcomes. This study evaluated late outcomes of participants managed under an unmasked 0/1-hour high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) protocol compared with a 0/3-hour masked hs-cTnT protocol. Methods: We conducted a multicenter prospective patient-level randomized comparison of care informed by unmasked 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol (reported to <5 ng/L) versus standard practice masked hs-cTnT testing (reported to ≤29 ng/L) assessed at 0/3 hours and followed participants for 12 months. Participants included were those presenting to metropolitan emergency departments with suspected acute coronary syndromes, without ECG evidence of coronary ischemia. The primary end point was time to all-cause death or myocardial infarction using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for clustering within hospitals. Results: Between August 2015 and April 2019, we randomized 3378 participants, of whom 108 withdrew, resulting in 12-month follow-up for 3270 participants (masked: 1632; unmasked: 1638). Among these, 2993 (91.5%) had an initial troponin concentration of ≤29 ng/L. Deployment of the 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol was associated with reductions in functional testing. Over 12-month follow-up, there was no difference in invasive coronary angiography (0/1-hour unmasked: 232/1638 [14.2%]; 0/3-hour masked: 202/1632 [12.4%]; P =0.13), although an increase was seen among patients with hs-cTnT levels within the masked range (0/1-hour unmasked arm: 168/1507 [11.2%]; 0/3-hour masked arm: 124/1486 [8.3%]; P =0.010). By 12 months, all-cause death and myocardial infarction did not differ between study arms overall (0/1-hour: 82/1638 [5.0%] versus 0/3-hour: 62/1632 [3.8%]; hazard ratio, 1.32 [95% CI, 0.95–1.83]; P =0.10). Among participants with initial troponin T concentrations ≤29 ng/L, unmasked hs-cTnT reporting was associated with an increase in death or myocardial infarction (0/1-hour: 55/1507 [3.7%] versus 0/3-hour: 34/1486 [2.3%]; hazard ratio, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.05–2.46]; P =0.030). Conclusions: Unmasked hs-cTnT reporting deployed within a 0/1-hour protocol did not reduce ischemic events over 12-month follow-up. Changes in practice associated with the implementation of this protocol may be associated with an increase in death and myocardial infarction among those with newly identified troponin elevations. Registration: URL: https://www.anzctr.org.au ; Unique identifier: ACTRN12615001379505.
Demonstrating that a 0/1-hour hs-TnT protocol improves the effectiveness and efficiency of care within a robust comparative study will fill an evidence gap that currently limits the translation of more precise hs-TnT testing into better patient and health service outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.