Economic Considerations of Early Rule-In/Rule-Out Algorithms for The Diagnosis of Myocardial Infarction in The Emergency Department Using Cardiac Troponin and Glycemic Biomarkers

High-sensitivity troponin assays for early rule-out of acute myocardial infarction in people with acute chest pain: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Early diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction is important, but only 20% of emergency admissions for chest pain will actually have an acute myocardial infarction. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays may allow rapid rule out of myocardial infarction and avoid unnecessary hospital admissions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays for the management of adults presenting with acute chest pain, in particular for the early rule-out of acute myocardial infarction.

METHODS

Sixteen databases were searched up to September 2019. Review methods followed published guidelines. Studies were assessed for quality using appropriate risk-of-bias tools. The bivariate model was used to estimate summary sensitivity and specificity for meta-analyses involving four or more studies; otherwise, random-effects logistic regression was used. The health economic analysis considered the long-term costs and quality-adjusted life-years associated with different troponin testing methods. The de novo model consisted of a decision tree and a state-transition cohort model. A lifetime time horizon (of 60 years) was used.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies (123 publications) were included in the review. The high-sensitivity cardiac troponin test strategies evaluated are defined by the combination of four factors (i.e. assay, number and timing of tests, and threshold concentration), resulting in a large number of possible combinations. Clinical opinion indicated a minimum clinically acceptable sensitivity of 97%. When considering single test strategies, only those using a threshold at or near to the limit of detection for the assay, in a sample taken at presentation, met the minimum clinically acceptable sensitivity criterion. The majority of the multiple test strategies that met this criterion comprised an initial rule-out step, based on high-sensitivity cardiac troponin levels in a sample taken on presentation and a minimum symptom duration, and a second stage for patients not meeting the initial rule-out criteria, based on presentation levels of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin and absolute change after 1, 2 or 3 hours. Two large cluster randomised controlled trials found that implementation of an early rule-out pathway for myocardial infarction reduced length of stay and rate of hospital admission without increasing cardiac events. In the base-case analysis, standard troponin testing was both the most effective and the most costly. Other testing strategies with a sensitivity of 100% (subject to uncertainty) were almost equally effective, resulting in the same life-year and quality-adjusted life-year gain at up to four decimal places. Comparisons based on the next best alternative showed that for willingness-to-pay values below £8455 per quality-adjusted life-year, the Access High Sensitivity Troponin I (Beckman Coulter, Brea, CA, USA) [(symptoms > 3 hours AND < 4 ng/l at 0 hours) OR (< 5 ng/l AND Δ < 5 ng/l at 0 to 2 hours)] would be cost-effective. For thresholds between £8455 and £20,190 per quality-adjusted life-year, the Elecsys® Troponin-T high sensitive (Roche, Basel, Switzerland) (< 12 ng/l at 0 hours AND Δ < 3 ng/l at 0 to 1 hours) would be cost-effective. For a threshold > £20,190 per quality-adjusted life-year, the Dimension Vista® High-Sensitivity Troponin I (Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) (< 5 ng/l at 0 hours AND Δ < 2 ng/l at 0 to 1 hours) would be cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

High-sensitivity cardiac troponin testing may be cost-effective compared with standard troponin testing.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019154716.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 33. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Clinical chemistry score versus high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I and T tests alone to identify patients at low or high risk for myocardial infarction or death at presentation to the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Testing for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) may assist triage and clinical decision-making in patients presenting to the emergency department with symptoms of acute coronary syndrome; however, this could result in the misclassification of risk because of analytical variation or laboratory error. We sought to evaluate a new laboratory-based risk-stratification tool that incorporates tests for hs-cTn, glucose level and estimated glomerular filtration rate to identify patients at risk of myocardial infarction or death when presenting to the emergency department.

METHODS

We constructed the clinical chemistry score (CCS) (range 0-5 points) and validated it as a predictor of 30-day myocardial infarction (MI) or death using data from 4 cohort studies involving patients who presented to the emergency department with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome. We calculated diagnostic parameters for the CCS score separately using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT).

RESULTS

For the combined cohorts (n = 4245), 17.1% of participants had an MI or died within 30 days. A CCS score of 0 points best identified low-risk participants: the hs-cTnI CCS had a sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 99.5%-100%), with 8.9% (95% CI 8.1%-9.8%) of the population classified as being at low risk of MI or death within 30 days; the hs-cTnT CCS had a sensitivity of 99.9% (95% CI 99.2%-100%), with 10.5% (95% CI 9.6%-11.4%) of the population classified as being at low risk. The CCS had better sensitivity than hs-cTn alone (hs-cTnI < 5 ng/L: 96.6%, 95% CI 95.0%-97.8%; hs-cTnT < 6 ng/L: 98.2%, 95% CI 97.0%-99.0%). A CCS score of 5 points best identified patients at high risk (hs-cTnI CCS: specificity 96.6%, 95% CI 96.0%-97.2%; 11.2% [95% CI 10.3%-12.2%] of the population classified as being at high risk; hs-cTnT CCS: specificity 94.0%, 95% CI 93.1%-94.7%; 13.1% [95% CI 12.1%-14.1%] of the population classified as being at high risk) compared with using the overall 99th percentiles for the hs-cTn assays (specificity of hs-cTnI 93.2%, 95% CI 92.3-94.0; specificity of hs-cTnT 73.8%, 95% CI 72.3-75.2).

INTERPRETATION

The CCS score at the chosen cut-offs was more sensitive and specific than hs-cTn alone for risk stratification of patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected acute coronary syndrome. Study registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, nos. NCT01994577; NCT02355457.

Combining High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin I and Cardiac Troponin T in the Early Diagnosis of Acute Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

Combining 2 signals of cardiomyocyte injury, cardiac troponin I (cTnI) and T (cTnT), might overcome some individual pathophysiological and analytical limitations and thereby increase diagnostic accuracy for acute myocardial infarction with a single blood draw. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of combinations of high-sensitivity (hs) cTnI and hs-cTnT for the early diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction.

METHODS

The diagnostic performance of combining hs-cTnI (Architect, Abbott) and hs-cTnT (Elecsys, Roche) concentrations (sum, product, ratio, and a combination algorithm) obtained at the time of presentation was evaluated in a large multicenter diagnostic study of patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. The optimal rule-out and rule-in thresholds were externally validated in a second large multicenter diagnostic study. The proportion of patients eligible for early rule-out was compared with the European Society of Cardiology 0/1 and 0/3 hour algorithms.

RESULTS

Combining hs-cTnI and hs-cTnT concentrations did not consistently increase overall diagnostic accuracy as compared with the individual isoforms. However, the combination improved the proportion of patients meeting criteria for very early rule-out. With the European Society of Cardiology 2015 guideline recommended algorithms and cut-offs, the proportion meeting rule-out criteria after the baseline blood sampling was limited (6% to 24%) and assay dependent. Application of optimized cut-off values using the sum (9 ng/L) and product (18 ng²/L²) of hs-cTnI and hs-cTnT concentrations led to an increase in the proportion ruled-out after a single blood draw to 34% to 41% in the original (sum: negative predictive value [NPV] 100% [95% confidence interval (CI), 99.5% to 100%]; product: NPV 100% [95% CI, 99.5% to 100%]) and in the validation cohort (sum: NPV 99.6% [95% CI, 99.0-99.9%]; product: NPV 99.4% [95% CI, 98.8-99.8%]). The use of a combination algorithm (hs-cTnI <4 ng/L and hs-cTnT <9 ng/L) showed comparable results for rule-out (40% to 43% ruled out; NPV original cohort 99.9% [95% CI, 99.2-100%]; NPV validation cohort 99.5% [95% CI, 98.9-99.8%]) and rule-in (positive predictive value [PPV] original cohort 74.4% [95% Cl, 69.6-78.8%]; PPV validation cohort 84.0% [95% Cl, 79.7-87.6%]).

CONCLUSIONS

New strategies combining hs-cTnI and hs-cTnT concentrations may significantly increase the number of patients eligible for very early and safe rule-out, but do not seem helpful for the rule-in of acute myocardial infarction.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL (APACE): https://www.clinicaltrial.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00470587. URL (ADAPT): www.anzctr.org.au . Unique identifier: ACTRN12611001069943.

Cost analysis of early discharge using combined copeptin/cardiac troponin testing versus serial cardiac troponin testing in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

Symptoms indicating acute coronary syndrome are commonly seen in emergency rooms, but only 10% of patients are actually diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The Guidelines for the diagnosis of patients with suspected AMI include either multiple testing of cardiac troponin (cTN) or a single combined test of cTN and copeptin, which facilitates earlier diagnosis or exclusion of AMI. The aim of the present analysis was to investigate the impact of combined copeptin/cTN testing on health care resource consumption and related costs both during and after initial hospital treatment.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The analysis was based on the BIC-8 trial and financial data of participating study sites. A cost analysis was carried out primarily from the hospital perspective and secondarily from the perspective of German statutory health insurers. The underlying assumptions of the investigation were tested for robustness in additional sensitivity analyses. In total, the data of 713 patients (n = 359 combined copeptin/cTN testing, n = 354 serial cTN testing) were evaluated. From a hospital perspective, the combined copeptin/cTN testing showed a reduced number of medical procedures and a lower frequency of inpatient admissions. The average staff time was significantly reduced by a mean of 49 minutes (95% confidence interval (CI) 46 to 53) per patient, accompanied by a significant mean reduction of 131 minutes (95%CI 104 to 158) in the time patients stayed in the emergency room. The initial hospital treatment was less cost-intensive. Over the entire study period, no significant cost differences were observed between the groups for health insurance.

CONCLUSION

The combined copeptin/cTN testing has the potential to save costs and staff time in acute care and for the entire hospital stay. The primary explanations for these findings are early identification and ruling out patients without AMI along with the associated reduced need for acute medical treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01498731.

5th generation cardiac troponin I and T assays in clinical routine - A head-to-head comparison with data from the Linz troponin (LITROP) study

BACKGROUND

In Europe, clinicians use so called high-sensitivity assays for the measurement of cardiac troponin I and T (i.e., hs-cTnI and hs-cTnT assays, also termed 5th generation assays) since several years. We aimed at performing a head-to-head comparison of two 5th generation assays in "real life use".

METHODS

We studied 3588 consecutive patients presenting to an emergency department. We used both, a hs-cTnI assay from Abbott and a hs-cTnT assay from Roche in clinical routine. We assessed (1) the capabilities of hs-cTnI and hs-cTnT for the prediction of 3.7 year all-cause mortality; (2) discordant diagnoses of myocardial injury by hs-cTnI and hs-cTnT according to the European gender-neutral 99th percentile upper reference limits (i.e., 26 ng/L and 14 ng/L, respectively); and (3) analyte kinetics in patient with serial troponin measurements.

RESULTS

With respect to prognosis of all-cause mortality, the AUC of hs-cTnI was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.80-0.82), and the AUC of hs-cTnT was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.84-0.86). With respect to discordant diagnoses, 21% of the 3588 patients were classified as having myocardial injury by hs-cTnT but not by hs-cTnI, and < 1% were classified as having myocardial injury by hs-cTnI but not by hs-cTnT. In the patients with serial blood sampling, the median delta values were 6.3 ng/L and 25% for hs-cTnI, and 4.2 ng/L and 16% for hs-cTnT.

CONCLUSION

We found different characteristics of the Abbott hs-cTnI and the Roche hs-cTnT assays, especially when using the European gender-neutral 99th percentile upper reference limits. Clinically, these different characteristics are related to discordant results in the diagnosis and prognosis of patients presenting to an emergency department.

Performance of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin in the emergency department for myocardial infarction and a composite cardiac outcome across different estimated glomerular filtration rates

BACKGROUND

Clinicians regularly observe increased high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) concentrations in patients with low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The challenge is to differentiate acute coronary syndrome (ACS) from increased hs-cTn results across a range of eGFR. The objective of this study was to determined the optimal hs-cTn concentrations for acute myocardial infarction (MI) and a composite cardiovascular outcome across different eGFR ranges and to assess the utility of a low hs-cTn cutoff to rule-out events.

METHODS

We undertook an observational study in the emergency department of patients (n = 1212) with symptoms suggestive of ACS who had an eGFR and at least one Roche hs-cTnT and one Abbott hs-cTnI result. The 7-day outcomes were MI or a composite of MI, unstable angina, congestive heart failure, serious ventricular cardiac arrhythmia, or death. The maximum hs-cTn concentration was assessed across different eGFR ranges (<30,30-59,60-89,≥90 ml/min/1.73m²) by spearman correlation, ROC-curve analyses, and sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) for the proposed rule-out hs-cTn cutoffs (hs-cTnI<5 ng/l and hs-cTnT<6 ng/l) for the outcomes.

RESULTS

Both hs-cTnI and hs-cTnT concentrations were negatively correlated with eGFR. The lower the eGFR, the lower the AUC and the higher the optimal hs-cTn cutoffs for both MI and the composite outcome. The highest combined sensitivity (100%), NPV (100%) and proportion of low-risk for MI (45% of group) was observed for patients with hs-cTnT<6 ng/l with an eGFR≥90.

CONCLUSION

The test performance for hs-cTn for diagnosing or ruling-out an acute cardiac event varies per the eGFR. Accurate risk stratification requires knowledge of the eGFR.

Economic evaluation of the one-hour rule-out and rule-in algorithm for acute myocardial infarction using the high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T assay in the emergency department

Background

The 1-hour (h) algorithm triages patients presenting with suspected acute myocardial infarction (AMI) to the emergency department (ED) towards “rule-out,” “rule-in,” or “observation,” depending on baseline and 1-h levels of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn). The economic consequences of applying the accelerated 1-h algorithm are unknown.

Methods and findings

We performed a post-hoc economic analysis in a large, diagnostic, multicenter study of hs-cTnT using central adjudication of the final diagnosis by two independent cardiologists. Length of stay (LoS), resource utilization (RU), and predicted diagnostic accuracy of the 1-h algorithm compared to standard of care (SoC) in the ED were estimated. The ED LoS, RU, and accuracy of the 1-h algorithm was compared to that achieved by the SoC at ED discharge. Expert opinion was sought to characterize clinical implementation of the 1-h algorithm, which required blood draws at ED presentation and 1h, after which “rule-in” patients were transferred for coronary angiography, “rule-out” patients underwent outpatient stress testing, and “observation” patients received SoC. Unit costs were for the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Germany. The sensitivity and specificity for the 1-h algorithm were 87% and 96%, respectively, compared to 69% and 98% for SoC. The mean ED LoS for the 1-h algorithm was 4.3h—it was 6.5h for SoC, which is a reduction of 33%. The 1-h algorithm was associated with reductions in RU, driven largely by the shorter LoS in the ED for patients with a diagnosis other than AMI. The estimated total costs per patient were £2,480 for the 1-h algorithm compared to £4,561 for SoC, a reduction of up to 46%.

Conclusions

The analysis shows that the use of 1-h algorithm is associated with reduction in overall AMI diagnostic costs, provided it is carefully implemented in clinical practice. These results need to be prospectively validated in the future.