Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@remsenmedia.com&api_key=81853a771c3a3a2c6b2553a65bc33b056f08&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: The universal definition of myocardial infarction (UDMI) standardizes the approach to the diagnosis and management of myocardial infarction. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin testing is recommended because these assays have improved precision at low concentrations, but concerns over specificity may have limited their implementation.
Methods: We undertook a global survey of 1902 medical centers in 23 countries evenly distributed across 5 continents to assess adoption of key recommendations from the UDMI. Respondents involved in the diagnosis and management of patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome completed a structured telephone questionnaire detailing the primary biomarker, diagnostic thresholds, and clinical pathways used to identify myocardial infarction.
Results: Cardiac troponin was the primary diagnostic biomarker at 96% of surveyed sites. Only 41% of centers had adopted high-sensitivity assays, with wide variation from 7% in North America to 60% in Europe. Sites using high-sensitivity troponin more frequently used serial sampling pathways (91% vs 78%) and the 99th percentile diagnostic threshold (74% vs 66%) than sites using previous-generation assays. Furthermore, high-sensitivity institutions more often used earlier serial sampling (≤3 h) and accelerated diagnostic pathways. Fewer than 1 in 5 high-sensitivity sites had adopted sex-specific thresholds (18%).
Conclusions: There has been global progress toward the recommendations of the UDMI, particularly in the use of the 99th percentile diagnostic threshold and serial sampling. However, high-sensitivity assays are still used by a minority of sites, and sex-specific thresholds by even fewer. Additional efforts are required to improve risk stratification and diagnosis of patients with myocardial infarction.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2018.298059 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!