ArticleEmergency medicine Australasia : EMA2025
Effect of change of high-sensitivity troponin I assay on emergency department diagnosis and disposition of patients with possible acute coronary syndrome.
Article in Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveChanging cardiac troponin (cTn) assays may affect a hospital's admission and myocardial infarction rates. The effect of changing from a contemporary to high-sensitivity (hs) cTnI assay has been well described, but the real-life impact on disposition and diagnosis of changing from one hs-cTnI assay to another has not.
methodsAll patients who received a troponin measurement in the ED during 16 weeks were adjudicated to identify those the attending physician investigated for possible acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and for clinical outcomes. The Abbott ARCHITECT hs-cTnI assay was in use for the first 8 weeks, followed by the Beckman Coulter hs-cTnI assay for the second 8 weeks.
resultsFewer patients were investigated with the Abbott assay (2213), than the Beckman assay (2683). A larger proportion were investigated for ACS in the Abbott (64.8%) than the Beckman (60.3%) arm. Among those investigated for ACS the rate of myocardial infarction decreased on changing from Abbott (12.8%) to Beckman (8.8%). Adjusted odds of a myocardial infarction were lower for the Beckman arm, Odds Ratio 0.69 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.88). A lower proportion of Abbott than Beckman had myocardial injury (at least one ED cTnI ≥ upper reference limit) 26.4% compared with 29.8%. The proportion admitted to hospital decreased from the Abbott arm (42.5%) to the Beckman arm (36.8%).
conclusionsA change in cTnI assay resulted in a decreased rate of myocardial infarction and admission despite an increase in rate of myocardial injury among patients investigated for ACS.
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.