This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

A. Bradley Eisenbrey, MD, PhD; Joseph D. Artiss, PhD
Wayne State University School of Medicine Detroit, Mich

JAMA. 1995;274(17):1343-1344.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—Despite their obvious enthusiasm for point-of-care testing for cardiac troponin T (cTnT), Dr Antman and colleagues¹ have not provided convincing evidence that this technology is either applicable or appropriate in the clinical setting. Many of the arguments used to justify using a test with a false-positive rate of 35% and a sensitivity ranging rom only 33% to a maximum of 86% are paper tigers. The time needed to perform creatine kinase (CK), CK-MB, and troponin assays on modern random-access chemistry and immunochemistry analyzers is as little as 17 minutes in the clinical laboratory, not 2 hours as the authors cited. Moreover, recent studies^2,3 comparing immunoassays for cardiac troponin (troponin T or I) with CK-MB show similar sensitivity of cardiac troponin to CK-MB for detection of acute mycocardial infarction. According to these studies, in the laboratory setting there was also an increased specificity for myocardial damage . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?