Cardiac Troponin Testing as a Component of Return to Play Cardiac Screening in Young Competitive Athletes Following SARS‐CoV‐2 Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Initial protocols for return to play cardiac testing in young competitive athletes following SARS-CoV-2 infection recommended cardiac troponin (cTn) to screen for cardiac involvement. This study aimed to define the diagnostic yield of cTn in athletes undergoing cardiovascular testing following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods and Results This prospective, observational cohort study from ORCCA (Outcomes Registry for Cardiac Conditions in Athletes) included collegiate athletes who underwent cTn testing as a component of return to play protocols following SARS-CoV-2 infection. The cTn values were stratified as undetectable, detectable but within normal limits, and abnormal (>99% percentile). The presence of probable or definite SARS-CoV-2 myocardial involvement was compared between those with normal versus abnormal cTn levels. A total of 3184/3685 (86%) athletes in the ORCCA database met the inclusion criteria for this study (age 20±1 years, 32% female athletes, 28% Black race). The median time from SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis to cTn testing was 13 days (interquartile range, 11, 18 days). The cTn levels were undetectable in 2942 athletes (92%), detectable but within normal limits in 210 athletes (7%), and abnormal in 32 athletes (1%). Of the 32 athletes with abnormal cTn testing, 19/32 (59%) underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, 30/32 (94%) underwent transthoracic echocardiography, and 1/32 (3%) did not have cardiac imaging. One athlete with abnormal troponin met the criteria for definite or probable SARS-CoV-2 myocardial involvement. In the total cohort, 21/3184 (0.7%) had SARS-CoV-2 myocardial involvement, among whom 20/21 (95%) had normal troponin testing. Conclusions Abnormal cTn during routine return to play cardiac screening among competitive athletes following SARS-CoV-2 infection appears to have limited diagnostic utility.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".