2000
DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.102.11.1216
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

It’s Time for a Change to a Troponin Standard

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

6
354
1
26

Year Published

2001
2001
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 572 publications
(387 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
6
354
1
26
Order By: Relevance
“…Embora consideradas específicas para o miocárdio, resultados falsopositivos de troponina foram publicados por causa da presença de fibrina no soro, da presença de anticorpos heterofílicos e da reação cruzada com anticorpos humanos 67 .…”
Section: Tipounclassified
“…Embora consideradas específicas para o miocárdio, resultados falsopositivos de troponina foram publicados por causa da presença de fibrina no soro, da presença de anticorpos heterofílicos e da reação cruzada com anticorpos humanos 67 .…”
Section: Tipounclassified
“…Cardiac troponins are presently regarded as the most cardiac-specific of currently available biochemical markers for the diagnosis of myocardial injury [1]. In particular, cardiac troponin I (cTnI) and cardiac troponin T (cTnT) have been identified.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Presently, cardiac troponins (cTn) are the most specific and sensitive indicators of myocardial damage. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] An increased blood level of troponins, particularly that of cTnT, also predicts a less favorable outcome in patients with ACS. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] The release of cTnT appears to indicate recent thrombotic complication of unstable plaques and identifies patients who might benefit from antithrombotic therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin 13 or glycoporotein IIb/IIIa platelet receptor antagonists.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…8,11 These values vary in different laboratories, and there is still no consensus on the best cut-off point values. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] In earlier studies, using a first generation cTnT test, values of ≥ 0.20 or 0.10 µg/l were shown to predict an increased risk of adverse outcome. However, with such a test, Lindahl et al noted that the risk already increased with ≥ 0.06 µg/l cTnT levels.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%