• Acad Emerg Med · Jun 2009

    Multicenter Study

    The incremental benefit of a shortness-of-breath biomarker panel in emergency department patients with dyspnea.

    • Adam J Singer, Henry C Thode, Gary B Green, Robert Birkhahn, Nathan I Shapiro, Charles Cairns, Brigitte M Baumann, Richard Aghababian, Douglas Char, and Judd E Hollander.
    • Department of Emergency Medicine, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA. adam.singer@stonybrook.edu
    • Acad Emerg Med. 2009 Jun 1;16(6):488-94.

    ObjectivesThe objective was to determine the incremental benefit of a shortness-of-breath (SOB) point-of-care biomarker panel on the diagnostic accuracy of emergency department (ED) patients presenting with dyspnea.MethodsAdult ED patients at 10 U.S. EDs with SOB were included. The physician's estimates of the pretest clinical probability of heart failure (HF), acute myocardial infarction (MI), and pulmonary embolism (PE) were recorded using deciles (0%-100%). Blood samples were analyzed using a SOB point-of-care biomarker panel (troponin I, myoglobin, creatinine kinase-myocardial band isoenzyme [CK-MB], D-dimer, and B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP]). Thirty-day follow-up for MI, HF, and PE was performed. Data were analyzed using logistic regression and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis.ResultsOf 301 patients, the mean (+/-standard deviation [SD]) age was 61 (+/-18) years; 56% were female, 58% were white, and 38% were African American. Diagnoses included MI (n = 54), HF (n = 91), and PE (n = 16) in a total of 129 (43%) of the patients. High pretest clinical certainty (>or=80%) identified 60 of these 129 (46.5%) cases. The SOB point-of-care biomarker panel identified 66 additional cases of MI (n = 24), HF (n = 31), and PE (n = 11). The overall adjusted sensitivity for any diagnosis was increased from 65% to 70% with the addition of the SOB point-of-care biomarker panel (difference = 5%, 95% CI = -1.1% to 11%) while specificity was increased from 82% to 83% (difference = 1%, 95% CI = -4% to 7%). The model containing pretest probability and the results of the SOB panel had an area under the curve (AUC) of 83.4% (95% CI = 78.4% to 88.5%), which was not significantly better than the AUC of 80.4% (95% CI = 75.1% to 85.7%) for clinical probability alone.ConclusionsThe addition of the SOB panel of markers did not improve the AUC for diagnosing the combined set of clinical conditions. Using the disease-specific SOB biomarkers increased the sensitivity on a disease-by-disease basis; however, specificity was reduced.(c) 2009 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.