ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2024
Validation and correlation of high-sensitive troponin I and troponin T in the emergency department.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2024. 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.
- Association between admission high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T levels and clinical outcomes in acute intracerebral hemorrhage: a prospective cohort study.BMC neurology · 2026Article
- Elevated Cardiac Troponin in Non-Cardiac Conditions Unrelated to Acute Myocardial Infarction.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Revisiting High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin Abnormal Baseline Cutoffs: Implications for AMI Diagnosis in the Emergency Department.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTroponin elevation is frequently observed in various scenarios in the Emergency Department (ED), yet there is a paucity of studies investigating simultaneously measured high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) and troponin I (hs-cTnI) within a diverse cohort in a clinical setting.
methodsAll patients who underwent troponin testing at a single center were eligible for this study. Only patients with simultaneous samples with hs-cTnI (Siemens) and hs-cTnT (Roche) were included, regardless of chief complaint.
resultsAnalysis of 1987 samples from 1134 patients showed a significant correlation between hs-cTnT and hs-cTnI (r = 0.86, p < 0.01). Of these samples, 65% exceeded the upper reference limit (URL) for hs-cTnT, and 30% for hs-cTnI with 39% who exhibited elevated hs-cTnT levels alongside normal hs-cTnI levels. The area under the curve (AUC) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) for the index visit was 0.80 (95% CI; 0.75-0.85) for hs-cTnT and 0.87 (95% CI; 0.83-0.91) for hs-cTnI. Sensitivity and specificity were 91% and 39% for hs-cTnT, and 80% and 80% for hs-cTnI. Positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) was 9.3% and 98.5% for hs-cTnT respectively, corresponding for hs-cTnI was 21.3% and 98.3% respectively. Hazard ratios for 1-year mortality were 1.52 (95% CI; 1.40-1.66) for hs-cTnT and 1.26 (95% CI; 1.18-1.34) for hs-cTnI.
conclusionElevated troponins above the URL were very common in this diverse cohort, particularly for hs-cTnT, which was twice as frequent compared to hs-cTnI, resulting in low specificity and PPV for AMI.
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.