Comparative Study of Laboratory Versus Bedside High-Sensitivity Troponin I in the Emergency Medicine Department of a Tertiary Care Hospital in India

Varsha Shinde,Yash Dixit,Pranay Penmetsa,Avinav Luthra
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.66512
2024-08-09
Cureus
Abstract:Background: Evaluating high-sensitivity troponin I levels in emergency medicine is critical for diagnosing acute myocardial infarction (AMI). This study aims to evaluate the central laboratory versus bedside troponin I test in the emergency department of a tertiary care center. Material and methods: This prospective observational study was conducted at Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Pune, Maharashtra, India, from October to December 2023. Patient samples were analyzed in the central laboratory using the Dimension EXL 200 (Siemens® Healthcare Diagnostics Inc., Erlangen, Germany) as the gold standard test and through point-of-care testing using the TriageTrue® (Quidel Corporation, San Diego, CA) high-sensitivity troponin I kit, which was run on the Triage® MeterPro® device (Quidel Corporation, San Diego, CA). This device quantitatively determines troponin I in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid-anticoagulated whole blood and plasma specimens. The results were compared. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 18 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). An unpaired t-test was performed to compare the difference in time taken using the two testing methods. Result: The mean time for obtaining troponin I results was substantially shorter with bedside testing (14.91 minutes, standard deviation (SD) = 0.5) than with laboratory testing (119.1 minutes, SD = 5.03). Statistical analysis revealed a significant difference (t = -172.36, p < 0.001). A chi-square test was conducted to assess the disparity between the two testing methods, yielding a chi-square value of 32.64 and a p value of 0.00001, indicating a significant difference between bedside testing and laboratory testing. Conclusion: The bedside high-sensitivity troponin I test offers a considerable advantage over laboratory testing regarding turnaround time within the emergency medicine department in India. This rapid diagnostic capability is crucial for timely management, which is beneficial for patients inconclusive of acute coronary syndrome-like non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). It is also cost-effective. It also reduces the emergency boarding time and may reduce the number of unnecessary admissions in healthcare facilities.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?