Important Differences Between Manufacturers When Transitioning From a Contemporary Cardiac Troponin Assay to a High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin Assay
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Despite high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hsTn) assays having superior analytical and clinical performance compared with contemporary cTn assays, there are still analytical issues that may necessitate that clinical laboratories institute additional testing and inform clinicians of errors when reporting hsTn results.1Kavsak P.A. Hill S.A. McQueen M.J. Devereaux P.J. Implications of adjustment of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T assay.Clin Chem. 2013; 59: 574-576Crossref PubMed Scopus (30) Google Scholar, 2Kavsak P.A. Cerasuolo J.O. Ko D.T. et al.High-sensitivity cardiac troponin i vs a clinical chemistry score for predicting all-cause mortality in an emergency department population.CJC Open. 2020; 20: 296-302Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (5) Google Scholar, 3Favresse J. Cadrobbi J. Eucher C. et al.Non-reproducible cardiac troponin results occurring with a particular reagent lot.Clin Chem Lab Med. 2020; 59: e9-e12Crossref PubMed Scopus (4) Google Scholar We have recently identified that the Ortho hsTnI assay misclassifies patients with myocardial injury (∼10% false positives for injury at a hospital and cancer centre), compared with the Abbott hsTnI assay.4Kavsak P.A. Mondoux S. Worster A. et al.Misclassification of myocardial injury by a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assay.Can J Cardiol. 2021; 37 (523.e7-8)Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (5) Google Scholar It is unclear what the impact would be for hospital sites transitioning from a contemporary cTn assay to Ortho’s hsTnI assay and whether the increase in positivity would be evident at another hospital setting. Given this, we assessed the impact of transitioning from a contemporary cTnI assay (Siemens EXL cTnI normal < 0.06 ug/L) to the Ortho hsTnI (female normal: <10 ng/L; male normal: <14 ng/L) using the published 99th-percentile cutoffs on the percentage (%) of positive results at a community hospital with an emergency department (ED) (West Lincoln Memorial Hospital [∼60 beds]). Over the first 18 weeks after commencing Ortho hsTnI testing at this hospital, the % positive was higher (26%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 25%–29%; n = 1914 total results; 87.0% results from ED in 2020) vs the Siemens cTnI assay in the corresponding timeframe in 2019 (13%; 95% CI: 11%-15%; n = 1628 total results, with 85.6% of results from ED). After the laboratory program instituted duplicate testing for the Ortho hsTnI assay (to mitigate analytical outliers) with any positive results reflexed for Abbott hsTnI, over 4 weeks, the Ortho hsTnI assay still yielded higher % positive results (29%; 95% CI: 24%-34%; n = 452 total results) compared with the Siemens cTnI (21%; 95% CI: 17%-26%; n = 417; total results in 2019; P = 0.02). The Abbott hsTnI assay yielded positivity estimates over these 4 weeks (23%; 95% CI: 19%-28%) similar to those from the Siemens cTnI assay (P = 0.55). The number of patients that were positive by Ortho hsTnI and negative by Abbott hsTnI over these 4 weeks was 15, or 6.4% (95% CI: 3.9%-10.4%) of the population with hsTnI measured. None of these 15 patients had a diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome with the discordant findings between Ortho hsTnI and Abbott hsTnI (Supplemental Table S1). Removal of the Ortho false positives and results with macrocomplexes (Fig. 1) yielded a higher correlation between Ortho hsTnI and Abbott hsTnI in this subgroup (rho = 0.94; 95% CI: 0.91-0.96; n = 91), with closer agreement to what has been observed in patients with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome.4Kavsak P.A. Mondoux S. Worster A. et al.Misclassification of myocardial injury by a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assay.Can J Cardiol. 2021; 37 (523.e7-8)Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (5) Google Scholar These data support suboptimal performance of Ortho hsTnI for the detection of myocardial injury in the community-hospital setting, with confirmation by another hsTnI assay helpful to prevent a misdiagnosis. We thank the laboratory staff within the Hamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program for performing the testing. No funding was received for this letter.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».