Determination of the Optimal Cut-off Value of Cardiac Troponin I for the Diagnosis of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease at the Manila Doctors Hospital (CTNI-CKD MDH Study)

Ethel P Mabbagu,Crizelle C Arias,Felix Eduardo R Punzalan,Bernadette A Tumanan-Mendoza,Noemi S Pestaño
DOI: https://doi.org/10.69944/pjc.29e6ec3112
2014-06-15
Abstract:INTRODUCTION: Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) among chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients may present with atypical symptoms and nonspecific electrocardiographic findings. Diagnosis of AMI has been dependent on cardiac biomarkers, especially cardiac Troponin I (cTnI), but is usually elevated in CKD patients. This study aimed to determine the optimal cut-off value of cTnI in CKD patients with angina/anginal equivalents admitted at Manila Doctors Hospital (MDH) to diagnose AMI. METHODOLOGY: This was a cross-sectional chart review study on adult CKD patients with angina or angina equivalents. cTnI levels were determined using Vitros Eci Troponin I ES Assay. The optimal cut-off to diagnose AMI was determined using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: The prevalence of AMI was 60.71%. The median troponin I levels for patients with AMI was 0.41ng/ ml, and 0.1ng/ml for those without AMI (p<0.001). An elevated troponin I was defined here as higher than 0.034 ng/mL; the median troponin I levels of both patients with or without AMI were above this level. The optimal cut off value was 1 ng/ml, with an area under the ROC curve was 0.72, a sensitivity of 30.15%, and a specificity of 88.64%. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of AMI among CKD patients at MDH is high at 60.71%. The median level of troponin I among patients with CKD is elevated regardless of whether they suffered AMI or not. However, the median level of troponin I in patients with AMI was higher than those without AMI. The optimal cut-off value to diagnose AMI in patients with CKD and angina or angina equivalents is 1ng/ml. Elevations of troponin I among CKD patients may represent myocardial injury, and further cardiac evaluation is sought until proven otherwise.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?