Clinical Laboratory Practice Recommendations for the Use of Cardiac Troponin in Acute Coronary Syndrome: Expert Opinion from the Academy of the American Association for Clinical Chemistry and the Task Force on Clinical Applications of Cardiac Bio-Markers of the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine

摘要

This document is an essential companion to the third iteration of the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry [NACB(8), now the American Association for Clinical Chemistry (AACC) Academy] Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines (LMPG) on cardiac markers. The expert consensus recommendations were drafted in collaboration with the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Task Force on Clinical Applications of Bio-Markers (IFCC TF-CB). We determined that there is sufficient clinical guidance on the use of cardiac troponin (cTn) testing from clinical practice groups. Thus, in this expert consensus document, we focused on clinical laboratory practice recommendations for high-sensitivity (hs)-cTn assays. This document utilized the expert opinion class of evidence to focus on the following 10 topics: (a) quality control (QC) utilization, (b) validation of the lower reportable analytical limits, (c) units to be used in reporting measurable concentrations for patients and QC materials, (d) 99th percentile sex-specific upper reference limits to define the reference interval; (e) criteria required to define hs-cTn assays, (f) communication with clinicians and the labor-atory's role in educating clinicians regarding the influence of preanalytic and analytic problems that can confound assay results, (g) studies on hs-cTn assays and how authors need to document preanalytical and analytical variables, (h) harmonizing and standardizing assay results and the role of commutable materials, (i) time to reporting of results from sample receipt and sample collection, and (j) changes in hs-cTn concentrations over time and the role of both analytical and biological variabilities in interpreting results of serial blood collections. (c) 2017 American Association for Clinical Chemistry