High Baseline High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T Concentrations and Risk of Index Acute Myocardial Infarction.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the previously recommended baseline high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) thresholds of 52 and 100 ng/L in identifying patients at high risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study compared the positive predictive value (PPV) for index AMI of these high-risk hs-cTnT thresholds in adult patients in the emergency department undergoing hs-cTnT measurement. RESULTS: The adjudicated MAyo Southwest Wisconsin 5th Gen Troponin T ImplementatiON cohort included 2053 patients, with 157 (7.6%) who received a diagnosis of AMI. The hs-cTnT concentrations of greater than 52 and greater than 100 ng/L resulted in PPVs of 41% (95% CI, 35%-48%) and 57% (95% CI, 48%-66%). In patients with chest discomfort, hs-cTnT concentrations greater than 52 ng/L resulted in a PPV of 66% (95% CI, 56%-76%) and hs-cTnT concentrations greater than 100 ng/L resulted in a PPV of 77% (95% CI, 65%-87%). The CV Data Mart Biomarker cohort included 143,709 patients, and 3003 (2.1%) received a diagnosis of AMI. Baseline hs-cTnT concentrations greater than 52 and greater than 100 ng/L resulted in PPVs of 12% (95% CI, 11%-12%) and 17% (95% CI, 17%-19%), respectively. In patients with chest pain and hs-cTnT concentrations greater than 52 ng/L, the PPV for MI was 17% (95% CI, 15%-18%) and in those with concentrations greater than 100 ng/L, only 22% (95% CI, 19%-25%). CONCLUSION: In unselected patients undergoing hs-cTnT measurement, the hs-cTnT thresholds of greater than 52 and greater than 100 ng/L provide suboptimal performance for identifying high-risk patients. In patients with chest discomfort, an hs-cTnT concentration of greater than 100 ng/L, but not the European Society of Cardiology-recommended threshold of greater than 52 ng/L, provides an acceptable performance but should be used only with other clinical features.

Use of the HEAR Score for 30-Day Risk-Stratification in Emergency Department Patients.

BACKGROUND: The 2021 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association chest pain guidelines recommend risk scores such as HEAR (History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk factors) for short-term risk stratification, yet limited data exist integrating them with high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT). METHODS: Retrospective, multicenter (n = 2), observational, US cohort study of consecutive emergency department patients without ST-elevation myocardial infarction who had at least one hs-cTnT (limit of quantitation [LoQ] <6 ng/L, and sex-specific 99th percentiles of 10 ng/L for women and 15 ng/L for men) measurement on clinical indications in whom HEAR scores (0-8) were calculated. The composite major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) outcome was 30-day prognosis. RESULTS: Among 1979 emergency department patients undergoing hs-cTnT measurement, 1045 (53%) were low risk (0-3), 914 (46%) intermediate risk (4-6), and 20 (1%) high risk (7-8) based on HEAR scores. HEAR scores were not associated with increased risk of 30-day MACE in adjusted analyses. Patients with quantifiable hs-cTnT (LoQ-99th) had an increased risk for 30-day MACE (3.4%) irrespective of HEAR scores. Those with serial hs-cTnT <99th percentile remained at low risk (range 0%-1.2%) across all HEAR score strata. Higher scores were not associated with long-term (2-year) events. CONCLUSIONS: HEAR scores are of limited value in those with baseline hs-cTnT 99th percentile to define short-term prognosis. In those with baseline quantifiable hs-cTnT within the reference range (<99th percentile), a higher risk (>1%) for 30-day MACE exists even in those with low HEAR scores. With serial hs-cTnT measurements, HEAR scores overestimate risk when hs-cTnT remains <99th percentile.

Diagnosis and Prognosis of Type 2 Myocardial Infarction Using Objective Evidence of Acute Myocardial Ischemia: A Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: Differentiating type 2 myocardial infarction from myocardial injury can be difficult. In addition, the presence of objective evidence of myocardial ischemia may facilitate identification of high-risk type 2 myocardial infarction patients. METHODS: This was an observational cohort study of adult emergency department patients undergoing high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) measurement. Patients with ≥1 hs-cTnT >99th percentile were adjudicated following the Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. Patients were categorized as "subjective type 2 myocardial infarction" when ischemic symptoms were the lone criteria supporting type 2 myocardial infarction, or "objective type 2 myocardial infarction" when there was ≥1 objective clinical feature (electrocardiography, imaging, angiography) of acute myocardial ischemia. The primary outcome was mortality. RESULTS: A total of 857 patients were included, among which 55 (6.4%) were classified as subjective type 2 myocardial infarction, 36 (4.2%) as objective type 2 myocardial infarction, and 702 (82%) as myocardial injury. Those with objective type 2 myocardial infarction had a higher risk of mortality during the index presentation (17% vs 1.7%, P < .0001; hazard ratio 11.1; 95% confidence interval, 3.7-33.4) and at 2-year follow-up (47% vs 31%, P = .04; hazard ratio 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-3.14) than those with myocardial injury. Objective type 2 myocardial infarction had a higher mortality than subjective type 2 myocardial infarction at index presentation (17% vs 2.0%, P = .01) and at 1 (25% vs 9.1%, P = .04) and 3 months (31% vs 13%, P = .04) follow-up. There were no mortality differences between subjective type 2 myocardial infarction and myocardial injury. CONCLUSION: In patients diagnosed with type 2 myocardial infarction, those with objective evidence of myocardial ischemia have significantly worse outcomes compared with those with myocardial injury and subjective type 2 myocardial infarction. A more rigorous type 2 myocardial infarction definition that emphasizes these criteria may facilitate diagnosis and risk-stratification.

Artificial intelligence-augmented electrocardiography for left ventricular systolic dysfunction in patients undergoing high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T.

AIMS: Our goal was to evaluate a previously validated artificial intelligence-augmented electrocardiography (AI-ECG) screening tool for left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) in patients undergoing high-sensitivity-cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT). METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective application of AI-ECG for LVSD in emergency department (ED) patients undergoing hs-cTnT. AI-ECG scores (0-1) for probability of LVSD (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 35%) were obtained. An AI-ECG score ≥0.256 indicates a positive screen. The primary endpoint was a composite of post-discharge major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) at two years follow-up. Among 1977 patients, 248 (13%) had a positive AI-ECG. When compared with patients with a negative AI-ECG, those with a positive AI-ECG had a higher risk for MACE [48 vs. 21%, P < 0.0001, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-1.75]. This was largely because of a higher rate of deaths (32 vs. 14%, P < 0.0001; adjusted HR 1.26, 95% 0.95-1.66) and heart failure hospitalizations (26 vs. 6.1%, P < 0.001; adjusted HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.25-2.45). Together, hs-cTnT and AI-ECG resulted in the following MACE rates and adjusted HRs: hs-cTnT < 99th percentile and negative AI-ECG: 116/1176 (11%; reference), hs-cTnT < 99th percentile and positive AI-ECG: 28/107 (26%; adjusted HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.01-2.36), hs-cTnT > 99th percentile and negative AI-ECG: 233/553 (42%; adjusted HR 2.12, 95% CI 1.66, 2.70), and hs-cTnT > 99th percentile and positive AI-ECG: 91/141 (65%; adjusted HR 2.83, 95% CI 2.06, 3.87). CONCLUSION: Among ED patients evaluated with hs-cTnT, a positive AI-ECG for LVSD identifies patients at high risk for MACE. The conjoint use of hs-cTnT and AI-ECG facilitates risk stratification.

Major adverse cardiovascular events after diagnosis of myocardial injury and types 1 and 2 myocardial infarction.

AIMS: Limited US outcome data exist among patients with myocardial injury and types 1 and 2 myocardial infarction (MI) evaluated with high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn). METHODS AND RESULTS: This is an observational US cohort study of emergency department (ED) patients undergoing hs-cTnT measurement. Cases with ≥1 hs-cTnT increase >99th percentile were adjudicated following the Fourth Universal Definition of MI. Post-discharge major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) included death, MI, heart failure (HF) hospitalization, stroke or transient ischaemic attack, and new-onset atrial fibrillation or flutter during 2 years follow-up. Among 2002 patients, 857 (43%) had ≥1 hs-cTnT >99th percentile. Among these, 702 (81.9%) had myocardial injury, 64 (7.5%) had type 1 MI, and 91 (10.6%) had type 2 MI. Compared with patients without myocardial injury, type 2 MI [8.4 vs. 50%; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 2.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.49-3.58] and myocardial injury (8.4 vs. 47%; adjusted HR 3.13, 95% CI 2.39-4.09) had a higher risk of MACE, in large part because of death and HF hospitalizations. Compared with patients with type 1 MI, type 2 MI (23 vs. 50%; adjusted HR 2.24; 95% CI 1.23-4.10) and myocardial injury (23 vs. 47%; adjusted HR 2.02; 95% CI 1.20-3.40) also have a higher risk of MACE. CONCLUSION: Among unselected US ED patients undergoing hs-cTnT measurement, most increases are due to myocardial injury, and type 2 MI is more frequent than type 1 MI. Patients with myocardial injury and type 2 MI have morbid outcomes, in large part due to death and HF.

Rapid Exclusion of Acute Myocardial Injury and Infarction With a Single High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T in the Emergency Department: A Multicenter United States Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: There are good data to support using a single high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) below the limit of detection of 5 ng/L to exclude acute myocardial infarction. Per the US Food and Drug Administration, hs-cTnT can only report to the limit of quantitation of 6 ng/L, a threshold for which there are limited data. Our goal was to determine whether a single hs-cTnT below the limit of quantitation of 6 ng/L is a safe strategy to identify patients at low risk for acute myocardial injury and infarction. METHODS: The efficacy (proportion identified as low risk based on baseline hs-cTnT<6 ng/L) of identifying low-risk patients was examined in a multicenter (n=22 sites) US cohort study of emergency department patients undergoing at least 1 hs-cTnT (CV Data Mart Biomarker cohort). We then determined the performance of a single hs-cTnT<6 ng/L (biomarker alone) to exclude acute myocardial injury (subsequent hs-cTnT >99th percentile in those with an initial hs-cTnT<6 ng/L). The clinically intended rule-out strategy combining a nonischemic ECG with a baseline hs-cTnT<6 ng/L was subsequently tested in an adjudicated cohort in which the diagnostic performance for ruling out acute myocardial infarction and safety (myocardial infarction or death at 30 days) were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 85 610 patients were evaluated in the CV Data Mart Biomarker cohort, among which 24 646 (29%) had a baseline hs-cTnT<6 ng/L. Women were more likely than men to have hs-cTnT<6 ng/L (38% versus 20%, P<0.0001). Among 11 962 patients with baseline hs-cTnT<6 ng/L and serial measurements, only 1.2% developed acute myocardial injury, resulting in a negative predictive value of 98.8% (95% CI, 98.6-99.0) and sensitivity of 99.6% (95% CI, 99.5-99.6). In the adjudicated cohort, a nonischemic ECG with hs-cTnT<6 ng/L identified 33% of patients (610/1849) as low risk and resulted in a negative predictive value and sensitivity of 100% and a 30-day rate of 0.2% for myocardial infarction or death. CONCLUSIONS: A single hs-cTnT below the limit of quantitation of 6 ng/L is a safe and rapid method to identify a substantial number of patients at very low risk for acute myocardial injury and infarction.

Clinical Impact of High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T Implementation in the Community.

BACKGROUND: Limited U.S. data exist regarding high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (cTn) implementation. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the impact of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (cTnT) implementation. METHODS: Observational U.S. cohort study of emergency department (ED) patients undergoing measurement of cTnT during the transition from 4th (pre-implementation March 12, 2018, to September 11, 2018) to 5th generation (Gen) cTnT (post-implementation September 12, 2018, to March 11, 2019). Diagnoses were adjudicated following the Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction (MI). Resources evaluated included length of stay, hospitalizations, and cardiac testing. RESULTS: In this study, 3,536 unique patients were evaluated, including 2,069 and 2,491 ED encounters pre- and post-implementation. Compared with 4th Gen cTnT, encounters with ≥1 cTnT >99th percentile increased using 5th Gen cTnT (15% vs. 47%; p < 0.0001). Acute MI (3.3% vs. 8.1%; p < 0.0001) and myocardial injury (11% vs. 38%; p < 0.0001) increased. Although type 1 MIs increased (1.7% vs. 2.9%; p = 0.0097), the overall MI increase was largely due to more type 2 MIs (1.6% vs. 5.2%; p < 0.0001). Women were less likely than men to have MI using 4th Gen cTnT (2.3% vs. 4.4%; p = 0.008) but not 5th Gen cTnT (7.7% vs. 8.5%; p = 0.46). Overall length of stay and stress testing were reduced, and angiography was increased (all p < 0.05). Among those without cTnT increases, there were more ED discharges and a reduction in length of stay, echocardiography, and stress tests (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: High-sensitivity cTnT implementation resulted in a marked increase in myocardial injury and MI, particularly in women and patients with type 2 MI. Despite this, except for angiography, overall resource use did not increase. Among those without cTnT increases, there were more ED discharges and fewer cardiac tests.

High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T for the Detection of Myocardial Injury and Risk Stratification in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist on high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) for risk-stratification in COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective, observational, US-based study of COVID-19 patients undergoing hs-cTnT. Outcomes included short-term mortality (in-hospital and 30-days post-discharge) and a composite of major adverse events, including respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation, cardiac arrest, and shock within the index presentation and/or mortality during the index hospitalization or within 30-days post-discharge. RESULTS: Among 367 COVID-19 patients undergoing hs-cTnT, myocardial injury was identified in 46%. They had a higher risk for mortality (20% vs 12%, P < 0.0001; unadjusted HR 4.44, 95% CI 2.13-9.25, P < 0.001) and major adverse events (35% vs. 11%, P < 0.0001; unadjusted OR 4.29, 95% CI 2.50-7.40, P < 0.0001). Myocardial injury was associated with major adverse events (adjusted OR 3.84, 95% CI 2.00-7.36, P < 0.0001) but not mortality. Baseline (adjusted OR 1.003, 95% CI 1.00-1.007, P = 0.047) and maximum (adjusted OR 1.005, 95% CI 1.001-1.009, P = 0.0012) hs-cTnT were independent predictors of major adverse events. Most (95%) increases were due to myocardial injury, with 5% (n = 8) classified as type 1 or 2 myocardial infarction. A single hs-cTnT <6 ng/L identified 26% of patients without mortality, with a 94.9% (95% CI 87.5-98.6) negative predictive value and 93.1% sensitivity (95% CI 83.3-98.1) for major adverse events in those presenting to the ED. CONCLUSIONS: Myocardial injury is frequent and prognostic in COVID-19. While most hs-cTnT increases are modest and due to myocardial injury, they have important prognostic implications. A single hs-cTnT <6 ng/L at presentation may facilitate the identification of patients with a favorable prognosis.