English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 0/3-hour algorithm is one of the most widely strategies used for rule-out or rule-in of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, a systematic evaluation of its performance has not been conducted. Furthermore, recent studies showed that the 0/3-hour algorithm is non-superior to the 0/1-hour algorithm. Purpose This study aims to summarize the safety and efficacy of the 0/3-hour algorithm and its comparative performance with the 0/1-hour algorithm. Methods We conducted literature search on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies published between 1 January 2008 and 31 May 2019. A bivariate random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate the primary and secondary outcomes, defined as index myocardial infarction and triage efficacy, major adverse cardiac event (MACE) or mortality at 30 days, respectively. Results A total of 10,832 patients from 9 studies with a pooled AMI prevalence of 16% were analyzed. The 0/3-hour algorithm ruled out 69% of the patients with a pooled sensitivity of 94.2% [95% CI: 87.6%–97.4%] and negative predictive value of 98.6% [95% CI: 97.0%–99.4%]; 17% of the patients were ruled in with a pooled specificity of 94.9% [95% CI: 88.6%–97.8%] and positive predictive value of 72.9% [95% CI: 54.6%–85.7%]. The 30-day mortality and 30-day MACE for patients that were ruled out were 0.0% [95% CI: 0.0%–0.0%] and 1.4% [95% CI: 0.9%–2.0%], respectively. In a pooled analysis of 3 cohorts, the 0/3-hour algorithm had a non-superior sensitivity compared with the 0/1-hour algorithm (94.4% [95% CI: 87.0%–97.7%] vs. 98.4% [95% CI: 95.4%–99.7%]). The 0/3-hour algorithm also had a similar rule-out efficacy compared with the 0/1-hour algorithm (52% [95% CI: 39%–65%] vs. 53% [95% CI: 42%–64%]). Conclusion The widely used 0/3-hour algorithm has sensitivity substantially below the consensus goal of 99% and may not be sufficiently safe for triage of myocardial infarction. Furthermore, the 0/3-hour algorithm is not superior to the 0/1-hour algorithm despite the additional triage time. Performance of ESC 0/3-hour algorithm Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Public Institution(s). Main funding source(s): Taiwan National Ministry of Science and Technology Grants

Performance of the ESC 0/3-hour algorithm for rapid triage of myocardial infarction: systematic review and meta-analysis