Effect of older age on diagnostic and prognostic performance of high-sensitivity troponin T in patients presenting to an emergency department
Background The effect of age on diagnostic and prognostic performance of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) has not been addressed adequately, so far. Methods High-sensitivity cardiac troponin T was measured serially in patients with acute symptoms presenting to our emergency department....
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The American heart journal 2012-11, Vol.164 (5), p.698-705.e4 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background The effect of age on diagnostic and prognostic performance of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) has not been addressed adequately, so far. Methods High-sensitivity cardiac troponin T was measured serially in patients with acute symptoms presenting to our emergency department. We tested the diagnostic and prognostic performance of baseline and serial hs-cTnT concentrations related to age in all consecutive patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (n = 342) or hs-cTnT increases not due to ACS (n = 442). Results Prevalence of elevated hs-cTnT in the study population was higher among patients ≥75 years compared with younger patients (89.1 % vs 73.3 %, hazard ratio [HR] 1.2, P < .0001). Elevated hs-cTnT was more likely due to ACS in the younger patients (HR 1.4, P = .001) and conversely more frequently due to non-ACS conditions in the elderly patients (HR 1.3, P = .0001). Diagnostic performance of hs-cTnT using the 99th percentile was significantly superior in younger than in elderly patients ( P < .0001). For receiver operating characteristic–optimized cutoffs, a trend to significance was found between younger and older patients (area under the curve 0.87 vs 0.79, P = .074), with higher sensitivities (98.2 % vs 72.6%) and negative predictive values (97.3% vs. 78.5%) for patients |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0002-8703 1097-6744 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.08.003 |