Bedside multimarker testing for risk stratification in chest pain units - The chest pain evaluation by creatine Kinase-MB, myoglobin, and troponin I (CHECKMATE) study
Lk. Newby et al., Bedside multimarker testing for risk stratification in chest pain units - The chest pain evaluation by creatine Kinase-MB, myoglobin, and troponin I (CHECKMATE) study, CIRCULATION, 103(14), 2001, pp. 1832-1837
Citations number
21
Categorie Soggetti
Cardiovascular & Respiratory Systems","Cardiovascular & Hematology Research
Background-Earlier rapid evaluation in chest pain units may make patient ca
re more efficient. A multimarker strategy (MMS) testing for several markers
of myocardial necrosis with different time-to-positivity profiles also may
offer clinical advantages.
Methods and Results-We prospectively compared bedside quantitative multimar
ker testing versus local laboratory results (LL) in 1005 patients in 6 ches
t pain units. Myoglobin, creatine kinase-MB, and troponin I were measured a
t 0, 3, 6, 9 to 12, and 16 to 24 hours after admission. Two MMS were define
d: MMS-I tall 3 markers) and MMS-2 (creatine kinase-MB and troponin I only)
. The primary assessment was to relate marker status with 30-day death or i
nfarction. More patients were positive by 24 hours with MMS than with LL (M
MS-1, 23.9%; MMS-2, 18.8%; LL, 8.8%; P=0.001, all comparisons), and they be
came positive sooner with MR IS-I (2.5 hours, P=0.023 versus LL) versus MMS
-2 (2.5 hours, P=0.026 versus LL) or LL (3.4 hours). The relation between b
aseline MMS status and 30-day death or infarction was stronger (MMS-1: posi
tive, 18.8% event rate versus negative, 3.0%, P=0.001; MMS-2. 21.9% versus
3.2%. P=0.001) than that for LL (13.6% versus 5.5%, P=0.038). MMS-I discrim
inated 30-day death better (positive, 2.0% versus negative, 0.0%, P=0.007)
than MMS-2 (positive, 1.8% versus negative, 0.2%; P=0.055) or LL (positive,
0.0%, versus negative, 0.5%; P=1.000).
Conclusions-Rapid multimarker analysis identifies positive patients earlier
and provides better risk stratification for mortality than a local laborat
ory-based, single-marker approach.