In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.

The free consultation period for this content is over.

It is now only available year-round to ESC Professional Members, Fellows of the ESC, and Young combined Members

Direct comparison of the safety and efficacy of two rule-out strategies for ami:combination of 1h-algorithm and undetectable levels at presentation versus 2h-accelerated diagnostic protocol

Session Acute intensive cardiovascular care

Speaker Maria Rubini Gimenez

Event : ESC Congress 2015

  • Topic : coronary artery disease, acute coronary syndromes, acute cardiac care
  • Sub-topic : Acute Cardiac Care – CCU, Intensive, and Critical Cardiovascular Care
  • Session type : Rapid Fire Abstracts

Authors : M Rubini Gimenez (Basel,CH), R Twerenbold (Basel,CH), K Wildi (Basel,CH), T Reichlin (Basel,CH), M Wagener (Basel,CH), C Puelacher (Basel,CH), S Osswald (Basel,CH), C Mueller (Basel,CH)

M. Rubini Gimenez1 , R. Twerenbold1 , K. Wildi1 , T. Reichlin1 , M. Wagener1 , C. Puelacher1 , S. Osswald1 , C. Mueller1 , 1University Hospital Basel, Department of Cardiology - Basel - Switzerland ,

European Heart Journal ( 2015 ) 36 ( Abstract Supplement ), 882

Purpose: Addressing the increasingly recognized, yet unmet clinical need for rapid rule-out of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), several novel strategies have been developed. Due to the lack of direct comparisons in the same dataset, selection of the best strategy for clinical practice is challenging. We therefore aimed to directly compare the safety and efficacy of two previously defined strategies: LOD (Undetectable levels of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) T at presentation) in combination with hs-cTnT 1h-algorithm versus 2h-ADP rule-out strategy (0h and 2h levels≤99th percentile, no significant ECG changes and TIMI Score of ≤1).

Methods: In a prospective international multicentre diagnostic study enrolling 1697 patients presenting with suspected AMI to the emergency department, the final diagnosis of AMI was adjudicated by two independent cardiologists using all available clinical information including serial hs-cTnT concentrations. Safety was quantified as the negative predictive value (NPV) for AMI in the rule-out zone of the respective rule-out strategies. Efficacy was quantified as the percentage of the overall cohort assigned to the rule-out zone by the respective strategy. Both strategies were applied using the two best-validated hs-cTn assays (hs-cTnT Roche: LOD <5ng/l; 1h algorithm: 0h<12ng/l and Δ0–1h<3ng/l and 99th percentile =14ng/l; hs-cTnI Abbott: LOD<2ng/l; 1h-algorithm 0h <5ng/L and Δ0–1h<2ng/l; 99th percentile=26.2ng/l) to ensure that findings are independent from the hs-cTn assay used. As both strategies should only be applied once ST-elevation MI (STEMI) has been excluded by the initial ECG, STEMI patients were excluded from the analysis.

Results: Acute myocardial infarction was the final diagnosis in 16% of patients. The safety was very high and comparable with both algorithms (LOD+1h-Algorithm NPV 99.9%, 95% CI 99.5–100% versus 2h ADP: NPV 100%, 95% CI 99.4–100% p=ns). Regarding efficacy, 1h-algorithm +LOD allowed rule-out in 60%of patients versus 38% with 2h ADP (p<0.001). Using hs-cTnI, the safety was very high and comparable with both algorithms (LOD+1h-Algorithm NPV 99.4%, 95% CI 98.6–99.9% versus 2h ADP: NPV 100%, 95% CI 99.3–100% p=ns). Regarding efficacy 1h-algorithm +LOD allowed rule-out in 53%of patients versus 38% with 2h ADP (p<0.001).

Conclusion: Both investigated rule-out strategies allow a safe rule-out of AMI. However the combination of LOD+1h-algorithm has a significantly higher efficacy allowing the rule out of more than double of patients and has the obvious advantage of allowing rule-out already after 1h and without the need of TIMI Score calculation.

The free consultation period for this content is over.

It is now only available year-round to ESC Professional Members, Fellows of the ESC, and Young combined Members

Get your access to resources

Join now
  • 1ESC Professional Members – access all ESC Congress resources 
  • 2ESC Association Members (Ivory, Silver, Gold) – access your Association’s resources
  • 3Under 40 or in training - with a Combined Membership, access all resources
Join now

Our sponsors

ESC 365 is supported by Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Lilly Alliance, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Alliance, Novartis Pharma AG and Vifor Pharma in the form of educational grants. The sponsors were not involved in the development of this platform and had no influence on its content.

logo esc

Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease

Who we are