This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Gibler, W. B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Gibler, W. B.

CLINICAL STUDY

A randomized trial of the effects of early cardiac serum marker availability on reperfusion therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction

The serial markers, acute myocardial infarction and rapid treatment trial (SMARTT)

Manuscript received July 30, 1999; revised manuscript received April 10, 2000, accepted June 15, 2000.

Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. W. Brian Gibler, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 231 Bethesda Avenue, Mail 0769, Cincinnati, Ohio 45267-0769
Brian.Gibler{at}uc.edu

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess whether the immediate availability of serum markers would increase the appropriate use of thrombolytic therapy.

BACKGROUND

Serum markers such as myoglobin and creatine kinase, MB fraction (CK-MB) are effective in detecting acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the emergency setting. Appropriate candidates for thrombolytic therapy are not always identified in the emergency department (ED), as 20% to 30% of eligible patients go untreated, representing 10% to 15% of all patients with AMI. Patients presenting with chest pain consistent with acute coronary syndrome were evaluated in the EDs of 12 hospitals throughout North America.

METHODS

In this randomized, controlled clinical trial, physicians received either the immediate myoglobin/CK-MB results at 0 and 1 h after enrollment (stat) or conventional reporting of myoglobin/CK-MB 3 h or more after hospital admission (control). The primary end point was the comparison of the proportion of patients within the stat group versus control group who received appropriate thrombolytic therapy. Secondary end points included the emergent use of any reperfusion treatment in both groups, initial hospital disposition of patients (coronary care unit, monitor or nonmonitor beds) and the proportion of patients appropriately discharged from the ED.

RESULTS

Of 6,352 patients enrolled, 814 (12.8%) were diagnosed as having AMI. For patients having AMI, there were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of patients treated with thrombolytic therapy between the stat and control groups (15.1% vs. 17.1%, p = 0.45). When only patients with ST segment elevation on their initial electrocardiogram were compared, there were still no significant differences between the groups. Also, there was no difference in the hospital placement of patients in critical care and non–critical care beds. The availability of early markers was associated with more hospital admissions as compared to the control group, as the number of patients discharged from the ED was decreased in the stat versus control groups (28.4% vs. 31.5%, p = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

The availability of 0- and 1-h myoglobin and CK-MB results after ED evaluation had no effect on the use of thrombolytic therapy for patients presenting with AMI, and it slightly increased the number of patients admitted to the hospital who had no evidence of acute myocardial necrosis.

Abbreviations and Acronyms   AMI = acute myocardial infarction   CCU = coronary care unit   CK-MB = creatine kinase, MB fraction   ECG = electrocardiogram   ED = emergency department   EMCREG = Emergency Medicine Cardiac Research Group   LBBB = left bundle branch block   PTCA = percutaneous coronary transluminal angioplasty   SMARTT = Serial Markers, Acute Myocardial Infarction and Rapid Treatment Trial   stat = immediate (0 and 1 h myoglobin/CK-MB)

This article has been cited by other articles:

				Part 5: Acute Coronary Syndromes Circulation, November 29, 2005; 112(22_suppl): III-55 - III-72. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Christenson, G. Innes, D. McKnight, B. Boychuk, E. Grafstein, C. R. Thompson, F. Rosenberg, A. H. Anis, K. Gin, J. Tilley, et al. Safety and efficiency of emergency department assessment of chest discomfort Can. Med. Assoc. J., June 8, 2004; 170(12): 1803 - 1807. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. H.B. Wu and F. S. Apple Drs. Wu and Apple respond: Clin. Chem., November 1, 2002; 48(11): 2080 - 2082. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. W. Hamm Cardiac Biomarkers for Rapid Evaluation of Chest Pain Circulation, September 25, 2001; 104(13): 1454 - 1456. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. McCord, R. M. Nowak, P. A. McCullough, C. Foreback, S. Borzak, G. Tokarski, M. C. Tomlanovich, G. Jacobsen, and W. D. Weaver Ninety-Minute Exclusion of Acute Myocardial Infarction By Use of Quantitative Point-of-Care Testing of Myoglobin and Troponin I Circulation, September 25, 2001; 104(13): 1483 - 1488. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. E. Bruns Laboratory-related Outcomes in Healthcare Clin. Chem., August 1, 2001; 47(8): 1547 - 1552. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Does Early Availability of Serum Markers for MI Increase Use of Thrombolysis? Journal Watch Emergency Medicine, January 4, 2001; 2001(104): 2 - 2. [Full Text]

				Early Cardiac Markers Do Not Improve Management Journal Watch (General), November 24, 2000; 2000(1124): 4 - 4. [Full Text]