2022 Volume 4 Issue 11 Pages 559-
To the Editor:
In the recent article in Circulation Reports, entitled “Performance of the 0-Hour/1-Hour Algorithm for Diagnosing Myocardial Infarction in Patients With Chest Pain in the Emergency Department – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis”, Nomura et al.1 conducted a meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of the 0-hour/1-hour algorithm and reported results for high-sensitivity troponin (hs-Tn) I and T assays. We are concerned that there are some issues with hs-Tn assays.
First, the authors included the results of 6 studies on hs-TnI assay in their meta-analysis; 5 of these studies used the Abbott ARCHITECT hs-TnI assay and 1 used the Siemens Dimension Vista 1500 hs-TnI assay. However, hs-TnI assays have different cut-off values and diagnostic performance, and the diagnostic performance of the 0-hour/1-hour algorithms is assay specific. Therefore, a meta-analysis of studies using different hs-TnI assays is probably incorrect and the results of different hs-TnI assays should be reported separately.
Second, the authors stated that 2 studies used a fourth-generation hs-TnT assay for the 0-hour/1-hour algorithm, but the fourth-generation troponin T assay is not an hs-Tn assay and therefore cannot be applied to the 0-hour/1-hour algorithm.2 It is probably an error for the fifth-generation troponin T.
M.T. has received non-financial support for research from Abbott Diagnostics Medical, Roche Diagnostics, and Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics. All other authors have no conflict of interest to declare.