ABSTRACT
Objective@#To determine the utility of a highly sensitive troponin assay when utilized in the emergency department. @*Methods@#The FAST-TRAC study prospectively enrolled >1,500 emergency department patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome within 6 hours of symptom onset and 2 hours of emergency department presentation. It has several unique features that are not found in the majority of studies evaluating troponin. These include a very early presenting population in whom prospective data collection of risk score parameters and the physician’s clinical impression of the probability of acute coronary syndrome before any troponin data were available. Furthermore, two gold standard diagnostic definitions were determined by a pair of cardiologists reviewing two separate data sets; one that included all local troponin testing results and a second that excluded troponin testing so that diagnosis was based solely on clinical grounds. By this method, a statistically valid head-to-head comparison of contemporary and high sensitivity troponin testing is obtainable. Finally, because of a significant delay in sample processing, a unique ability to define the molecular stability of various troponin assays is possible.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00880802
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cardiac troponins I (cTnI) and T (cTnT) have received international endorsement as the standard biomarkers for detection of myocardial injury, for risk stratification in patients suspected of acute coronary syndrome, and for the diagnosis of myocardial infarction. An evidence-based clinical database is growing rapidly for high-sensitivity (hs) troponin assays. Thus, clarifications of the analytical principles for the immunoassays used in clinical practice are important. CONTENT: The purpose of this mini-review is (a) to provide a background for the biochemistry of cTnT and cTnI and (b) to address the following analytical questions for both hs cTnI and cTnT assays: (i) How does an assay become designated hs? (ii) How does one realistically define healthy (normal) reference populations for determining the 99th percentile? (iii) What is the usual biological variation of these analytes? (iv) What assay imprecision characteristics are acceptable? (v) Will standardization of cardiac troponin assays be attainable? SUMMARY: This review raises important points regarding cTnI and cTnT assays and their reference limits and specifically addresses hs assays used to measure low concentrations (nanograms per liter or picograms per milliliter). Recommendations are made to help clarify the nomenclature. The review also identifies further challenges for the evolving science of cardiac troponin measurement. It is hoped that with the introduction of these concepts, both laboratorians and clinicians can develop a more unified view of how these assays are used worldwide in clinical practice.