ArticlePloS one2021
5th generation vs 4th generation troponin T in predicting major adverse cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in patients hospitalized for non-cardiac indications: A cohort study.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predicting adverse cardiovascular events in emergency department patients with bupropion overdose.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2024Article
- Postoperative Troponin Levels in Children Undergoing Open Heart Surgery With and Without Coronary Intervention.Pediatric cardiology · 2024Article
- Novel Biomarkers and Their Role in the Diagnosis and Prognosis of Acute Coronary Syndrome.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe frequency and implications of an elevated cardiac troponin (4th or 5th generation TnT) in patients outside of the emergency department or presenting with non-cardiac conditions is unclear.
methodsConsecutive patients aged 18 years or older admitted for a primary non-cardiac condition who had the 4th generation TnT drawn had the 5th generation TnT run on the residual blood sample. Primary and secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality (ACM) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) respectively at 1 year.
results918 patients were included (mean age 59.8 years, 55% male) in the cohort. 69% had elevated 5th generation TnT while 46% had elevated 4th generation TnT. 5th generation TnT was more sensitive and less specific than 4th generation TnT in predicting both ACM and MACE. The sensitivities for the 5th generation TnT assay were 85% for ACM and 90% for MACE rates, compared to 65% and 70% respectively for the 4th generation assay. 5th generation TnT positive patients that were missed by 4th generation TnT had a higher risk of ACM (27.5%) than patients with both assays negative (27.5% vs 11.1%, p<0.001), but lower than patients who had both assay positive (42.1%). MACE rates were not better stratified using the 5th generation TnT assay.
conclusionsIn patients admitted for a non-cardiac condition, 5th generation TnT is more sensitive although less specific in predicting MACE and ACM. 5th generation TnT identifies an intermediate risk group for ACM previously missed with the 4th generation assay.
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.