ArticleBMC health services research2013
Hospital laboratory reporting may be a barrier to detection of 'microsize' myocardial infarction in the US: an observational study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prospective validation of a 1-hour algorithm to rule-out and rule-in acute myocardial infarction using a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T assay.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2015Trial
- Review
- Primary Antiphospholipid Syndrome with and Without Acute Myocardial Infarction/Angina: A Cross-Sectional Study.Rheumatology and therapy · 2022Article
- Risk for cardiovascular events following 'microsize' versus usual myocardial infarctions.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2021Article
- Cardiovascular Disease Events and Mortality After Myocardial Infarction Among Black and White Adults: REGARDS Study.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2020Article
- Article
- Risk factors for 'microsize' vs. usual myocardial infarctions in the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2019Article
- Use of Medicare Claims Data for the Identification of Myocardial Infarction: The Reasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke Study.Medical care · 2018Article
- Diagnostic value of the cardiac electrical biomarker, a novel ECG marker indicating myocardial injury, in patients with symptoms suggestive of non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction.Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc · 2018Article
- N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and microsize myocardial infarction risk in the reasons for geographic and racial differences in stroke study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2018Article
- Trends in Use of Biomarker Protocols for the Evaluation of Possible Myocardial Infarction.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2017Article
- Ischemia modified albumin (IMA) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and left bundle branch block (LBBB). Does it make the difference?The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2017Article
- Novel biomarkers for cardiovascular risk prediction.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2017Review
- Coronary heart disease risk factors and outcomes in the twenty-first century: findings from the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) Study.Current hypertension reports · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInternational guidelines recommend that the decision threshold for troponin should be the 99th percentile of a normal population, or, if the laboratory assay is not sufficiently precise at this low level, the level at which the assay achieves a 10% or better coefficient of variation (CV). Our objectives were to examine US hospital laboratory troponin reports to determine whether either the 99th percentile or the 10% CV level were clearly indicated, and whether nonconcordance with these guidelines was a potential barrier to detecting clinically important microscopic or 'microsize' myocardial infarctions (MIs). To confirm past reports of the clinical importance of microsize MIs, we also contrasted in-hospital, 28-day and 1-year mortality among those with microsize and nonmicrosize MI.
methodsIn the REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke national prospective cohort study (n=30,239), 1029 participants were hospitalized for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) between 2003-2009. For each case, we recorded all thresholds of abnormal troponin on the laboratory report and whether the 99th percentile or 10% CV value were clearly identified. All cases were expert adjudicated for presence of MI. Peak troponin values were used to classify MIs as microsize MI (< five times the lowest listed upper limit of normal) and nonmicrosize MI.
resultsParticipants were hospitalized at 649 acute care US hospitals, only 2% of whose lab reports clearly identified the 99th percentile or the 10% CV level; 52% of reports indicated an indeterminate range, a practice that is no longer recommended. There were 183 microsize MIs and 353 nonmicrosize MIs. In-hospital mortality tended to be lower in the microsize than in the nonmicrosize MI group (1.1 vs. 3.6%, p = 0.09), but 28-day and 1-year mortality were similar (2.5% vs. 2.7% [p = 0.93] and 5.2% vs. 4.3% [p = 0.64], respectively).
conclusionsCurrent practices in many US hospitals created barriers to the clinical recognition of microsize MI, which was common and clinically important in our study. Improved hospital troponin reporting is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.