4.5 Review

Cardiac point of care testing: A focused review of current National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry guidelines and measurement platforms

Journal

CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 42, Issue 3, Pages 150-157

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2008.09.105

Keywords

Point of care; Cardiac markers; Cardiac troponin; Guidelines; Acute coronary syndromes; Myocardial infarction; Risk stratification

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Cardiac markers are a cornerstone for assessment of suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. The National Academy for Clinical Biochemistry has recently developed practice guidelines for clinical, analytical and point-of-care (POC) testing in the context of ACS. Several technologies have become available for POC applications. Setting: Cardiac troponin is the preferred biochemical marker for diagnosis, risk stratification and guiding management of suspected ACS patients. Samples must be collected with proper timing, typically on presentation and then 6 to 9 h later. Assays should work toward a goal of total CV < 10% at the 99th percentile cutpoint, and should adhere to specifications defined by professional organizations. A 1-h or less turnaround time is specified; quantitative POC testing should be implemented if this timing cannot be met consistently by the central laboratory. The same quality criteria for assays apply regardless of testing venue. Implementation/management: Laboratory medicine personnel must have active role in implementation, choice of technology and management of POC cardiac marker testing. Conclusions: Cardiac troponin measurements at POC are a viable alternative when testing needs cannot be met by the central laboratory. Laboratory medicine must be involved in implementation and ongoing service. Quality of testing must not be compromised by performance at POC. (C) 2008 The Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available