Home
Scholarly Works
Clinical evaluation of Ortho Clinical Diagnostics...
Journal article

Clinical evaluation of Ortho Clinical Diagnostics high-sensitivity cardiac Troponin I assay in patients with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome

Abstract

BACKGROUND: As more companies obtain regulatory approval for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays there is an urgent need for independent analytical and clinical evaluations. To this end, we have evaluated Ortho Clinical Diagnostics' hs-cTnI assay and compared it to their contemporary cTnI-ES assay in emergency department (ED) patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: The study cohort consisted of ED patients (n = 906) with symptoms suggestive of ACS who had Ortho hs-cTnI and cTnI-ES results at presentation and 3 h (with calculated delta (0-3 h) defined as the absolute concentration difference between paired results). The primary composite outcome was 7-day myocardial infarction (MI) or cardiovascular death, with secondary analyses performed for 7-day MI and index-MI. Analytical imprecision testing (i.e., coefficient of variation; CV), receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses with area under the curve (AUC), and diagnostic parameters (sensitivity/specificity/predictive values) were calculated. RESULTS: The hs-cTnI assay had superior precision compared to the cTnI-ES assay below 5 ng/L in EDTA plasma (hs-cTnI CV ≤ 15% versus cTnI-ES CV ≥ 85%). The AUCs were higher for hs-cTnI as compared to cTnI-ES at 0 h (0.88 vs. 0.85), 3 h (0.94 vs. 0.92), and the delta (0-3 h) value (0.91 vs. 0.85) for the primary composite outcome (p < 0.05). At 3 h, the sensitivity/specificity for index-MI was ≥97%/≥82%, for 7-day MI was ≥89%/≥84%, and for the primary composite outcome was ≥90%/≥85% using the manufacturer's sex-specific 99th-percentile cutoffs. CONCLUSION: The Ortho hs-cTnI assay has superior analytical and clinical performance over their contemporary cTnI-ES assay in evaluating ED patients with symptoms suggestive of ACS.

Authors

Kavsak PA; Mondoux SE; Sherbino J; Ma J; Clayton N; Hill SA; McQueen M; Mehta SR; Griffith LE; Devereaux PJ

Journal

Clinical Biochemistry, Vol. 80, , pp. 48–51

Publisher

Elsevier

Publication Date

June 1, 2020

DOI

10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2020.04.003

ISSN

0009-9120

Contact the Experts team